THE  OLD  DOCUMENTS 


AND 


THE  NEW  BIBLE. 

with  lllustraticns 


J.  P^ TERSON  SMYTH 


X)5I18S 
.566 


^bc  ©It)  2)ocumcnt0 


AND 


^be  mew  Bible. 


WITH   ELEVEN   ILLUSTRATIONS. 


BV  THE  SAME  AUTHOR. 


THIRTY-FIFTH    THOUSAND. 
Price  One  Shilling. 

How    WE    QOT    OUR    B1BI.E, 

An  Answer  to  Questions  Suggested  by  the 
LATE  Revision, 

WITH 

3£igbt  ipbotogtapb  SUustvatfons. 


LONDON : 
SAMUEL  BAGSTER  &  SONS,  Limited. 


^^ 


^> 


^ 


i 


g^fesi^, 


:~^;S-^;^-";;'--?*'-.v- 


^ht  (Bib   Bommmts 


AND 


An  Easy  Lesson  for  the  People  in  Biblical  Criticism. 


J.    PATKRSON  SMYTH,    LL.B.,   B.D. 

Senior  Moderator  and  Gold  Medalist,  Primate'!^  Hebrew  Prizeman,  ^c,  4"t 
Trinity  College,  Dublin. 


The    Old    Testament. 


Multfp  terricolis  lingTije,  coelestibus  una. 


NEW    YORK:    JAMES    POTT    &    CO., 

LONDON:     SAMUEL    BAGSTER    &    SONS,    limited. 

DUBLIN  :    EASON   &    SON,   limited. 


PREFACE 


In  our  grandfathers'  days,  in  the  simple  loving 
reverence  with  which  the  Bible  was  regarded  it  almost 
seemed  to  men  as  if,  clasped  and  covered 'complete,  it 
had  dropped  down  from  Heaven  like  the  image  of  the 
goddess  Diana.  It  was  much  too  sacred  a  thing  to 
be  the  subject  of  critical  inquiry ;  to  admit  the  possi- 
bility of  mistakes  in  its  text  would  have  been  little 
short  of  heresy ;  while  as  for  making  an  investigation 
into  the  composition  and  genuineness  of  its  books — 
why,  a  man  would  as  soon  have  thought  of  "  botanising 
upon  his  mother's  grave  !  " 

But  "  old  times  have  changed."  In  this  age  of  criti- 
cism nothing  is  too  sacred  to  be  questioned  and  inves- 
tigated, and  the  present  generation  is  accustomed  to 
see  the  most  vital  questions  connected  with  the  Bible 
discussed  with  the  utmost  freedom. 

Nor  is  the  discussion  confined,  as  in  former  days, 
to  the  circle  of  scholars  and  theologians.  The  sounds 
of  attack  and  defence  have  reached  the  ears  of  "  the 


vi  PREFACE. 

people "  outside  that  circle,  and  excited  a  spirit  of 
inquiry  which,  unsatisfied,  may  easily  pass  into  one  of 
doubt  and  uneasiness,''"  but  which,  rightly  directed, 
cannot  fail  to  lead  to  a  more  intelligent  belief  in  the 
Bible  and  its  claims.  People  want  to  be  told  without 
reservation  all  that  can  be  told  them  about  this  Bible 
of  theirs  ;  on  what  foundation  it  rests ;  why  they 
should  believe  in  its  genuineness,  its  authenticity,  its 
inspiration,  its  correctness  of  transmission  through  all 
the  centuries.  Never  before  perhaps  was  there  as 
much  of  unsatisfied  popular  questionings  (often  un- 
spoken questionings)  about  these  matters  as  at  the 
present  day. 

This  book  is  one  of  a  projected  series  in  answer  to 
these  popular  questionings.  It  covers  only  one  part 
of  the  ground.  It  is  not  a  book  of  "Evidences"  in 
favour  of  the  Bible  but  an  attempt  at  an  impartial 
history  of  facts.  It  is  not  an  erudite  treatise  for 
scholars  and  students,  but  a  simple  effort  to  ' '  shift 
knowledge  into  a  more  convenient  position  "  for  plain 

^  A  striking  confirmation  of  this  comes  to  me  evert  as  I  write. 
Before  me  lies  an  account  of  the  Triennial  Convention  of  the  American 
Church,  held  last  month,  where  one  Report  states  of  so  simple  a  matter 
as  the  publication  of  the  Revised  Bible,  "  not  all  the  assaults  of  scep- 
ticism have  so  shaken  the  ancient  reverence  for  the  Scriptures  in  the 
minds  of  Christians  at  large!''  What  an  amount  of  ignorance  about 
the  Bible  must  be  in  the  "minds  of  Christians  at  large  "  if  that  report 
be  correct !  Could  we  have  a  stronger  proof  of  the  need  there  is  of 
telling  people  all  that  can  be  told  them  about  their  Bible  ? 


PREFACE.  vii 

people  wiio  have  little  opportunity  of  studying  such 
subjects  for  themselves. 

Therefore  I  have  tried  to  write  it  as  simply  as  I 
could.  I  have  aimed  at  clearness  rather  than  at  com- 
pleteness. Therefore,  too,  I  have  as  far  as  possible 
avoided  cumbering  its  pages  with  references  to  learned 
authorities  which  would  be  quite  out  of  the  reach  of 
such  readers  as  I  have  in  view. 

It  may  be  well  to  state  here  the  plan  of  the  book 
which  is  fully  explained  later  on.  It  consists  of 
three  parts.  The  first  deals  with  the  Old  Hebrew 
Documents  and  the  question  of  their  correctness ;  the 
second  tells  of  other  old  documents  and  their  use  in 
testing  and  correcting  the  Hebrew;  while  the  third 
part  is  a  series  of  easy  illustrations  to  show  how  this 
testing  and  correcting  is  done. 

I  have  to  thank  Professor  Westwood  of  Oxford  for 
his  kind  permission  to  photograph  three  of  the 
following  plates  from  his  Palceogra]phia  Sacra  Pictoria. 

J.  P.   S. 


Christ  Church  Vicarage,  Kingstown, 
February  1890. 


List    of    Plates. 


1.  The  Moabite  Stone Frontispiece 

2.  Medieval  Hebrew  Manusckipts        .        .        ,  To  face  page  28 

3.  Illuminated  Manuscript  Titles        ...  ,,34 

4.  A  Page  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch    .        .  ,,49 

5.  Manuscript  with  Curious  Massoretic  Footnotes  „         91 

6.  The  Samaritan  Roll  at  Nablous     ...  ,,120 

7.  Ancient  Copies  of  the  Septuagint  ...  ,,148 

8.  The  Septuagint  of  Mount  Sinai      .        .        .  „        156 

9.  A  "Palimpsest"  Ma5:uscript     ....  ,,162 

10.  Syriac  Bible „        166 

11.  Scrap  of  an  ''Old  Latin"  Manuscript   .       .  ,,170 


CONTENTS, 


Booli  £ 

THE    OLD    HEBREW   DOCUMENTS 

AND  THE  QUESTION  OF 

BIBLICAL    CRITICISM. 


CHAPTER   I. 
HEBREW  WRITING,  EARLIER  AND  LATER. 

PAGE 

I.  Hebeew  Wkiting I 

II.  The  Ancient  Charactees 2 

III.  The  Shapira  Manuscripts 3 

IV.  The  Handwriting  op  the  Exiles 5 

CHAPTER  II. 

SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING. 

I.  Consonant-Writing 7 

II.  Curious  Mistakes 8 

III.  How  to  Read  without  Vowels 10 

IV.  Grammar  and  Theology 13 

V.  Similar  Letters 16 

VI.  The  ••  Guardians  Off  the  Lines  " 18 


s  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER   III. 
WHAT  IS  BIBLICAL  CRITICISM? 

PAGE 

I.  Mistakes  in  the  Manuscripts        ,        ....  20 

11.  Biblical  Criticism 22 

III.  Its  Axioms  and  Rules 24 

IV.  Its  Working  Material   ,...,..  26 


CHAPTER   IV. 

A  VIEW  OF  THE  OLD  MANUSCRIPTS. 

I.  Some  Curious  Old  Manuscripts 28 

II.  A  Perplexing  Discovery 30 

III.  The  Guardianship  op  the  Bible 31 

IV.  An  Ancient  Revision 32 

V.  The  Vanished  Manuscripts    ......  34 

VI.  Are  our  Manuscripts  Correct? 35 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

THE  EAKLY  AGES. 

I.  What  can  we  Learn  of  the  Vanished  Manuscripts?  37 

II.  Call  our  First  Witness — The  Sacred  Books      .        .  38 

III.  Summary  op  this  Evidence 44 

IV.  A  Search  for  Further  Evidence 47 

V.  Call  our  Next  Witness— The  Samaritan  Bible.        .  49 

VI.  Cross-Examine  our  First  Witness         .        .        .        -52 

VII.  The  Verdict 59 


CONTENTS.  xi 

CHAPTER  VI. 

THE    STORY   OF   THE   MANUSCRIPTS. 

THE  MEN  OF  THE  GKEAT  SYNAGOGUE. 

PAGE 

I.  The  Exiles'  Return 6i 

II.  The  Legend  of  the  Great  Synagogue  ....  63 

TIL  Is  the  Legend  True? 65 

IV.  Ancient  Criticism— Esau's  Teeth  .        ^        .        .        .  68 

v.  A  Famous  Witness  to  the  Great  Synagogue  Bible    .  70 

VI.  "The  Abomination  op  Desolation"       ....  74 

CHAPTER  VII. 

THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

THE  TALMUD  PERIOD. 


I.  The  College  op  Tiberias 
II.  The  Makers  op  the  Talmud 

III.  Their  "Biblical  Criticism". 

IV.  The  Bible  op  the  Academies 
V.  The  "Palestine  Text" 


77 
79 
80 

83 
85 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

THE  DAYS  OF  THE  MASSORETES. 

I.  Who  were  the  Massoretes? 88 

XL  Contents  op  the  Massorah 90 

III.  Its  Two  Classes  op  Notes 91 

IV.  What  is  in  the  Text? 92 

V.  What  should  be  in  the  Text? 97 

VI.  The  Vowels  and  Accents      .        .        .        .        .        .101 

VII.  Manuscript  Copying 103 

VIIT.  The  Last  op  the  Massoretes 104 

IX.  A  Mysterious  Document 105 

CHAPTER  IX. 

NOTES  AND  JOTTINGS 107 


CONTENTS. 
THE   OTHER    OLD   DOCUMENTS, 

AND  THEIR  USE  IN 

BIBLICAL    CRITICISM. 


INTRODUCTION 


DOCUMENT  No.  I. 


THE  PENTATEUCH  OF  THE  SAMARITANS. 

I.  The  Holy  Manuscript  of  Nablous 
II.  "Decline  and  Fall"  op  the  Samaritan  Bible  . 

III.  Its  Use  in  Criticism 

IV.  A  Roundabout  Story-teller 


PAOE 

117 


iiS 
120 
122 
124 


DOCUMENTS  No.  II. 

THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS. 
THE  TALMUD. 


I.  What  is  the  Talmud 
II.  Conflicting  Opinions 

III.  "Law  and  Legend" 

IV.  Talmud  Sayings 
V.  Bible  Commentary  . 

VI.  The  Legend  of  Sandalp; 
VII.  An  Ancient  "Rip  Van  Winkle" 
VIII.  •'  The  House  that  Jack  Built  " 


HON 


THE  TARGUMS 


126 
128 
130 
131 
134 
137 
139 
141 

144 


DOCUMENT  No.  III. 
THE  BIBLE  OF  ''THE  SEVENTY: 


I.  The  Apostles'  Bible 
II.  The  Romance  op  Aristeas     . 

III.  Who  made  the  Septuagint  ? . 

IV.  Its  Critical  Value 

V.  Famous  Septuagint  Manuscripts 


147 
149 

151 
153 
156 


CONTENTS.  xiii 

DOCUMENTS  No.  lY. 
A  BUNDLE  OF  GREEK  BIBLES. 

PAOK 

I.  A  Witness  to  the  Bible  of  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees    157 
II.  A  Renegade  and  his  Bible 157 

DOCUMENT    No.    V. 

THE  SYRIAC  BIBLE. 

I.  St.  Ephraem  the  Syrian 161 

II.  The  Oldest  Christian  Bible 162 

III.  Letter  from  the  Lord  Jesus  to  a  Syrian  King  .        .163 

IV.  Biblical  Criticism  and  the  Syriac  Bible      .        .        .166 

DOCUMENT  No.  VI. 

THE  "VULGATE"  OF  ST.  JEROME. 

I.  The  Monk  of  Bethlehem 169 

II.  The  "Temper  of  a  Saint" 171 

III.  Papal  Infallibility  and  Biblical  Criticism.        .        .174 

IV.  The  Value  op  the  Vulgate 176 


THE   NEW   BIBLE. 

A  SPECIMEN    OP 

BIBLICAL    CRITICISM. 


CHAPTER  I. 

CRITICS    AT    WORK. 

I.  Introductory      .        . 181 

II.  "The  Old  Testament  Sitting" 182 

III.  Defects  of  our  Specimen 183 

IV.  Nineteenth  Century  Massoretes 187 


XIV 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER  II. 
SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK. 

PAGE 

I.  Cain's  "Walk  in  the  Field" i88 

II.  A  Question  of  Vowels 190 

III.  The  Gibeonite  Ambassadors 191 

IV.  Manasseh  or  Moses 192 

V.  An  Infant  King ,        .193 

VI.  The  Ark  and  the  Ephod 194 

VII.  David  and  Goliath 196 

VIII.  The  Giant's  Brother 198 

IX.  The  Tords  op  the  Wilderness 200 

X.  Keri  and  Kethibh 200 

XI.  The  Old  Prophet  of  Bethel 201 

XII.  A  Son  of  Samuel  who  never  was  born      .        .        .  202 

XIII.  "Like  a  Lion" 204 

XIV.  "Not  Increased  their  Joy" 206 

CHAPTER  III. 
A  FURTHER  USE  OF  THE  ANCIENT  BIBLES. 


I.  The  Plain  of  Moreh 

II.  Leah's  "Troop" 

III.  The  Asherim  . 

IV.  AZAZEL       . 

V.  Gideon's  Return 
VI.  Ruler  or  Priest 

VII.  Ahab's  Pool   . 


208 
209 
209 
211 
211 
212 
21.^ 


INDEX 


215 


360  0ft   I. 


THE    OLD    HEBREW   DOCUMENTS, 

AND   THE   QUESTION   OP 

BIBLICAL  CRITICISM. 


SPECIMEN  PAGE  OF  AN  ORDINARY  HEBREW   BIBLE. 


Gen.  i.  i-io. 


uinn  ^:3-^;;  '^^n')  Jirtii  ^rtn  nn^n  r^m)  ^ 

f,    :        j":         -         'v    e  •  t  jt  :  it        '     vt  t  • 

"iD^^p_  3  ^D^^rr  ]?P'^^  ^?!?"5?  i^^'r^^^  r!^T. 

.>•   :•:  :r-  j       •  :r  A         •  :  c 

]>n^  -lii^rr  rn  dnH'?^*  b'l2^^  aizo"'2  -^^^<^■J^^^ 
9     iini^  Di>  "iprM^  2"i;?"''nn  nb'b  Nip 

|T  V  J.       'v  c       •    :r  •••>•       •  :r  t:at  t  jt 

b'l'^nD  ^■T'■)  a^^n  "^idb  ^^":)")  %i>  DNibh^  "idj^"*)  « 

.  :  -      J.    .        .AT  -       '    J    :    *=■   "e-T      ,•  :  •      •.•;         v      j- 

..  .__      C     I.     T,T  V  •         •.•;  ^-'—  MIT  'c-         '    >•• 

(  V  -:  .  -  -        J..         -     •  TIT  -  J      •  V  -:  •  ,.. 

w^r^t  vv'^b  D'ribi^  i^'^)p'^^ '  :p"%Ti  ^^^p-^b  ^;;d 

•ATT        -     'f.TlT  •>=•,•;  Jt':-  ',"  VIP       -    ',I.-TJT  S- .. 

ni^im  '^n^^  Dip^'^Pi^  D^Qii^n  jinriD  d^dh  i)ip'' 

CT      T|"    •  T      V  J    T  V  •.-     T      -  *    T~    •  •  -    -  't. 

•    vv  T   T--    ■         <•     y;  t':--  I"     •.:r        At   t  -  - 

iniiD""'^  wribi^  ^^"l''1  d'^d*'  Knp  d^dh  mpD^-i 


CHAPTEE  I. 

HEBREW  WRITING,  EARLIER  AND  LATER, 

I. 

Hebrew  Writing. 

The  reader  is  probably  aware  tliat  tlie  Old  Testament, 
with  some  little  exception,-^  is  written  in  Hebrew, 
the  "  holy  tongue "  of  the  Jews.  It  is  a  branch  of 
the  great  Semitic  family  of  languages,  so  called  because 
the  nations  to  which  they  belonged  were  considered  to 
be  chiefly  the  descendants  of  Shem  (Gen.  x.  21).  The 
Syriac  and  Arabic  represent  other  branches  of  the 
same  great  family,  and  the  increasing  knowledge  of 
them  in  recent  times  has  thrown  a  good  deal  of  light 
upon  the  language  of  the  Old  Testament. 

On  the  opposite  page  we  give  a  specimen  from  the 
first  chapter  of  Genesis  as  it  appears  in  an  ordinary 
printed  Hebrew  Bible.  Here  is  the  first  verse  with 
its  corresponding  English — 

'     V  T   T  >.. :  -c-  T    -  3"  A-      v;  jtt  «         ••   : 

.earth  the  and  heavens  the  God        created  beginning  the  In 

From   this   it  will   be   seen   that   the   language  is 

1  Portions  of  the  Books  of  Ezra  and  Daniel,  which  are  in  Aramaic, 
the  common  dialect  of  Palestine  after  the  Captivity. 

A 


2       HEBREW  WRITING,  EARLIER  AND  LATER. 

written  hacbward,  as  we  should  say,  i.e.,  from  right  to 
left.  The  pages  are  taken  in  the  same  order,  the  right 
hand  before  the  left ;  and  therefore,  in  the  reading  of 
a  Hebrew  Bible  (if  it  be  not  too  Irish  an  expression  to 
use),  the  beginning  of  the  book  is  always  at  the  end ! 


II. 
The  Ancient  Characters. 

Now  this  specimen  of  our  present  Hebrew  Bible 
belongs  to  the  later  or  Assyrian  writing.  The  char- 
acters differ  from  those  in  which  the  books  were 
originally  written,  much  as  the  clear  Eoman  type  of 
our  present  Bible  differs  from  the  old  black  letter  of 
Wycliff's  and  Tyndale's  versions.  The  ancient  Hebrew 
or  Phoenician  writing  does  not  exist  in  any  manu- 
script that  has  come  down  to  us,  though  it  is  rather 
like  the  writing  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  of  which 
we  shall  hear  farther  on.  We  have  some  old  coins  of 
the  time  of  Judas  Maccabeus  which  present  specimens 
of  it.  There  is  also  the  famous  Moabite  Stone,  dis- 
covered some  twenty  years  since,  the  actual  old  slab 
on  which  Mesha  "  the  sheepmaster,"  king  of  Moab, 
3000  years  ago  had  inscribed  in  these  ancient  char- 
acters his  own  version  of  the  fighting  with  Israel."^  In 
the  frontispiece  is  a  photograph  of  this  ancient  inscrip- 
tion, probably  the  very  form  in  which  the  finger  of 
God  traced  the  words  lono^  acjo  on  the  two  tables  of 

^  See  2  Kings  i.  l,  iii.  4 ;  2  Chron.  xx.,  &c. 


HEBREW  WRITING,  EARLIER  AND  LATER.      3 

stone  on  Mount  Sinai.      A  cast  of  it  may  be  seen  in 
any  good  library. 

And  very  recently,  in  a  curious  way,  a  new  speci- 
men has  come  to  light.  One  day,  in  the  summer  of 
1880,  a  number  of  boys  were  playing  about  the  Pool 
of  Siloam  near  Jerusalem.  There  is  at  the  upper  end 
a  tunnel  cut  out  of  the  solid  rock,  by  means  of  which 
the  Pool  is  fed ;  and  one  of  the  boys,  while  wading 
here,  slipped  and  fell  forward  into  the  waters  of  the 
tunnel.  It  was  a  fortunate  fall  for  us,  if  not  for  the 
boy ;  for,  as  he  was  recovering  himself,  his  eye  was 
caught  by  some  marks  like  letters  on  a  smooth  part  of 
the  rock ;  and  on  a  fuller  investigation  afterwards  by 
competent  scholars,  this  was  found  to  be  an  inscription 
by  the  workmen  of  the  tunnel,  written  in  ancient 
Hebrew  characters  somewhere  about  the  year  700  b.c.^ 

III. 

The  Shapira  Manuscripts. 

A  few  years  later,  and  it  seemed  as  if  even  the 
fame  of  these  discoveries  was  to  be  entirely  eclipsed. 
In  the  August  of  1883,  an  immense  sensation  was 
caused  in  the  learned  world  by  the  announcement  of 
a  most  wonderful  "find"  of  ancient  Hebrew  manu- 
scripts in  Palestine, — "  the  great  climax,"  it  was  called, 
'^  of  Biblical  discovery." 

^  An  interesting  account  of  this  inscription  is  given  in  the  Bishop  of 
Ossory's  "Echoes  of  Bible  History,"  where  it  is  shown  that  the  tunnel 
was  most  probably  that  made  by  Hezekiah,  when  he  "stopped  the 
upper  watercourse  of  Gihon  and  brought  it  straight  down  to  the  City 
of  David."     See  2  Chron.  xxxii.  2-4,  xxxii.  30. 


4      HEBREW  WRITING,  EARLIER  AND  LATER. 

It  consisted  of  fifteen  leather  slips,  black  with  age 
as  it  would  seem,  and  impregnated  with  the  faint 
odour  of  funereal  spices.  They  presented  to  the 
casual  observer  only  the  appearance  of  a  plain  oily 
surface,  but  on  touching  them  with  a  brush  dipped 
in  spirits  of  wine,  the  strange  old  writing  became 
visible, — forty  columns  of  Deuteronomy  in  the  ancient 
Hebrew  characters,  just  like  those  on  the  Moabite 
Stone,  and  apparently  dating  from  about  the  eighth 
or  ninth  century  before  Christ. 

These  precious  documents  were  brought  to  the 
British  Museum  by  a  Mr.  Shapira,  a  dealer  in  old 
manuscripts,  who  had  already  procured  through  the 
Arabs  many  literary  curiosities,  and  he  estimated  the 
value  of  this  new-found  treasure  at  one  million  pounds 
sterling !  A  council  of  the  greatest  experts  in  the 
kingdom  assembled  to  investigate  the  matter,  and 
Biblical  scholars  almost  held  their  breath  awaiting  the 
momentous  decision,  the  importance  of  which  was 
vastly  augmented  by  recent  controversies  as  to  the 
date,  composition,  and  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch. 

On  Tuesday,  August  2 1st,  the  decision  was  an- 
nounced in  a  leading  paragraph  of  the  Times.  The 
particulars  of  the  investigation  are  extremely  in- 
teresting, but  the  result  only  concerns  us  here.  The 
Shapira  bubble  had  burst !  The  much-talked  of 
manuscript  of  the  days  of  Jehoshaphat  was  found  to 
have  been  written  in  the  days  of  Victoria,  one  of 
the  cleverest  literary  swindles  perhaps  ever  recorded. 


HEBREW  WRITING,  EARLIER  AND  LATER.       5 

Thus  ended  the  Shapira  "  discovery."  Since  that 
time  nobody  ventures  to  speak  of  the  possibility  of 
manuscripts  yet  existing  in  the  ancient  Hebrew 
writing. 


IV. 

The  Handwriting  of  the  Exiles. 

When  did  the  change  from  these  ancient  characters 
to  the  present  square  writing  take  place  ?  That, 
reader,  is  not  an  easy  question  to  answer.  The  Jews, 
of  course,  say  in  the  days  of  Ezra.  But  the  Jews 
have  a  trick  of  putting  down  to  Ezra  or  to  Moses 
every  important  event  in  the  history  of  their  Bible, 
so  that  this  statement  does  not  count  for  much. 
Probably  the  change  was  a  gradual  one,  and  began 
at  or  soon  after  the  time  of  Ezra.  The  name  of  the 
new  writing  (Assyrian)  would  suggest  that  the  Israel- 
ites brought  it  with  them  on  their  return  from  the 
exile,  though,  on  the  other  hand,  a  tradition  that  they 
did  so  may  have  given  rise  to  the  name.  But  in 
any  case,  there  is  little  doubt  that  it  was  in  full 
possession  in  the  days  of  our  Lord.  An  interesting 
confirmation  of  this  is  His  expression  that  even  "  one 
Yod  or  one  tittle  should  in  no  wise  pass  from  the 
law  "  (Matt.  V.  1 8),  implying  that  the  Yod  (the  letter 
y)  was  the  very  smallest  letter,  as  it  is  in  the  pre- 
sent writing,  whereas  in  the  old  alphabet  it  was  one 
of  the  largest. 

The   Samaritans   still   retain   the   ancient  form    of 


6      HEBREW  WRITING,  EARLIER  AND  LATER. 

writing,  or  rather  a  modification  of  it,  and  have  always 
been  inclined  to  plume  themselves  considerably  on 
that  fact.  But  the  Jews  do  not  care  to  be  thus  easily 
set  down,  and  so  the  Babylonian  Talmud  cleverly  turns 
the  tables.  "  The  law,"  it  says,  "  was  given  to  Israel 
in  the  holy  tongue  and  in  the  ancient  Hebrew  writing. 
And  it  was  given  to  them  again  in  Ezra's  days  in 
the  square  Assyrian  writing.  The  Israelites  chose  to 
themselves  the  holy  tongue  in  the  square  writing,  and 
left  the  old  Hebrew  writing  to  ignorant  persons.  But 
who  are  these  idiots  or  ignorant  persons  ?  Rabbi 
Chasda  informs  us — the  Samaritans  !  " 


CHAPTER  II. 

SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING. 

I. 
Consonant-Writing. 

There  are  some  peculiarities  about  the  Hebrew  lan- 
guage which  it  is  important  the  reader  should  know, 
that  he  may  the  better  understand  some  of  the  ques- 
tions which  are  the  subject  of  Old  Testament  Biblical 
criticism. 

The  first  is  this,  that  the  Hebrciu  alphabet^  loili  in  its 
ancient  and  in  its  'present  form,  consists  of  consonants 
only.  In  the  specimen  given  already,  the  little  dots 
and  marks  underneath  the  letters  represent  the  vowel 
sounds.  But  these  marks  are  of  comparatively  modern 
date,  certainly  not  older  than  about  5  00  or  600  a.d. 
In  olden  times  the  reader  had  only  the  consonants 
before  him,  and  had  therefore  to  supply  the  right 
vowel  sounds  himself  in  reading. 

It  is  easy  to  see  how  in  such  a  case  the  same  word 
might  be  differently  read  according  to  the  different 
vowels  supplied.  For  example,  in  English,  B  R  N 
might  be  read  B^RN,  b^rn,  b,,rn,  BKiNy,  B^^R^Ny,  &c. ; 
and   if  there   were   no  vowel   marks   to   indicate   the 


8    SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING, 

sound,  we  sliould  have  to  be  taught,  like  the   Jews, 
which  word  the  writer  intended. 


II. 
Curious  Mistakes. 

We  have  many  instances  of  this  inconvenience  after 
Hebrew  had  ceased  to  be  a  commonly  spoken  language. 
The  great  Greek  version  of  the  Old  Testament,  the 
Septuagint,  of  which  we  shall  hear  later  on,^  is  a  case 
in  point.  It  is  full  of  discrepancies  arising  from  this 
cause.  Here,  for  example,  are  two  Hebrew  words  in 
Deuteronomy,  b  z  R  and  P  s  G  H,  which  in  our 
Hebrew  Bible  read  Bezer  and  Pisgah,  but  which  the 
Septuagint  translators  render  Bozor  and  Pasgah.  St. 
Jerome  (a.d.  400),  commenting  on  Gen.  xv.  1 1,  says 
that  his  copy  of  the  Septuagint,  by  supplying  the 
wrong  vowels,  tells  that  Abram,  instead  of  *'  driving 
the  fowls  away,"  as  our  Bible  has  it  (VaY^SHeeB  qT.j^i), 
actually  "  sat  down  with  them  "  (VaY^eSHgB  {Vj^i)  ! 

Or  would  the  reader  like  a  more  sensational  example, 
though  we  scarcely  care  to  vouch  for  its  truth.  Here 
is  a  story  ^  in  the  Jewish  Talmud,  in  a  comment  on 
I  Kings  xi.  15,  16,  where  "  Joab  had  smitten  every 
male  in  Edom." 

When   he   returned    from    the    slaughter    into   the 

1  It  is  important  that  the  reader  should  here  impress  this  name  on 
his  memory,  that  it  may  convey  a  clear  idea  when  he  meets  it  again. 
For  this  purpose  it  might  be  well  to  glance  forward  for  a  moment  to 
its  story  in  Book  II.  p.  148. 

2  The  story  is  told  by  Elias  Leyita  in  his  "Massoreth  Ham- 
massoreth,"  p.  128. 


SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING.    9 

presence  of  King  David,  "  Why  hast  thou  smitten 
them  all  ?  "  asked  the  king. 

"  Because,"  replied  the  warrior,  "  so  it  is  written, 
Thou  shalt  destroy  every  male  "  (z^K^n). 

"  z  K  R ! "  exclaimed  the  king,  "  we  read  it  z^k^r, 
every  memory,  every  memorial  of  them." 

Joab  was  enraged.  He  went  immediately  to  his 
Kabbi,  and  angrily  demanded,  "  How  teachest  thou  to 
read  this  word  ?  " 

"  ZgKgK,  memory,"  replied  the  Eabbi. 

Joab  drew  his  sword. 

"  Why  ?  "  asked  the  terrified  teacher. 

"  Because  it  is  written,  ^  Cursed  be  he  that  doeth 
the  work  of  the  Lord  deceitfully '  "  (Jer.  xlviii.  I  o). 

The  Eabbi  does  not  seem  to  have  been  at  all  sur- 
prised at  this  feat  of  quoting  from  a  prophet  who  was 
not  born  for  many  years  after.  He  tried  to  argue  his 
case,  but  all  in  vain.  Joab  was  nothing  if  not  scrip- 
tural. His  quotations  were  as  ready  as  those  of 
Cromwell's  Ironsides,  and  about  as  soothing  too.  "  It 
is  written  also,"  he  thundered,  as  he  drew  his  flashing 
blade  again,  "  Cursed  is  he  that  keepeth  back  his 
sword  from  blood  !  " 

For  the  reader's  comfort  be  it  recorded  that  the 
historian  leaves  it  an  open  question  whether  the  un- 
fortunate tutor  was  let  off,  or  whether  his  zealous 
pupil,  by  depriving  him  of  his  head,  cured  him  for  ever 
of  false  pronunciation.  The  story,  in  any  case,  will 
illustrate  our  point  as  to  the  possibility  of  error  in 
Hebrew  when  written  without  vowels. 


lo  SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING, 

III. 
How  to  Read  without  Vowels. 

To  the  Englisli  reader  this  consonant- writing  would 
seem  a  very  great  danger  to  the  purity  of  the  Hebrew 
Scriptures,  but  the  danger  was  really  a  very  slight  one 
after  all.  In  the  first  place.  Eastern  nations  depended 
on  the  memory  much  more  than  on  writings.  The 
Jewish  scribes  could  repeat  whole  books  of  their 
Scriptures  with  perfect  ease,  just  as  the  Mohammedans 
repeat  their  Koran  to-day.  And  thus  the  true  read- 
ing of  the  vowelless  words  was  handed  down  from  one 
generation  to  another.  When  a  young  Jewish  pupil 
began  to  read  the  Scriptures,  the  page  of  consonant 
words  was  opened  before  him ;  the  scribe,  his  teacher, 
read  over  the  words,  and  he  repeated  them  after  him, 
with  their  right  pronunciation.  His  task,  perhaps, 
might  be  expressed  as  a  saying  by  heart  with  the 
help  of  the  consonants.  We  Westerns  have  but 
little  notion  of  the  '  extraordinary  powers  in  this 
respect  possessed  by  the  Eastern  mind.  To  this  day 
Oriental  travellers  express  their  wonder  at  the  accu- 
racy with  which  the  minutest  details  of  a  lesson  can 
be  reproduced  long  afterwards  in  the  exact  words  of 
the  teacher. 

But  the  great  safeguard  lay  in  the  constitution  of 
the  language  itself.  In  Hebrew,  as  in  all  Semitic 
dialects,  the  main  ovot  idea  of  a  word  was  quite  in- 
tclligihle  from   the    consonants  alone.       For    example, 


SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING,  ii 

D  B  11  represented  the  idea  of  speaking,  and  according 
to  the  different  vowels  supplied  d.^b.^r,  DjEgR,  D^BggR,  &c., 
would  mean  to  speak,  to  say,  to  address,  to  converse 
with,  to  woo,  to  promise,  to  be  promised ;  also,  as  a 
noun,  a  speaker,  a  word,  a  commandment,  a  proposal,  a 
chronicle,  and  so  on. 

But  it  may  be  objected,  even  with  this  root-idea 
expressed,  how  was  the  reader  without  vowel  points 
to  know  the  exact  meaning  intended,  when  each  word 
might  be  read  in  so  many  different  ways  ? 

I  answer,  that  even  apart  from  the  wonderful  memory 
of  the  scholars,  the  C07itext  would,  in  almost  every  case, 
he  a  sufficient  guide  to  any  intelligent  reader.  No 
doubt  it  is  possible  to  read  a  vowelless  Hebrew  word 
in  different  ways  if  it  stand  alone ;  but  in  its  proper 
context  it  is  quite  a  different  matter.  Even  in  Eng- 
lish, with  the  great  disadvantage  of  having  no  fixed 
root  meaning  expressed  by  the  consonants,  vowelless 
words  are  often  quite  intelligible  when  read  in  their 
proper  context.  A  rapid  shorthand  writer  seldom  puts 
in  a  vowel,  and  he  can  read  his  notes  with  ease  long 
after  they  have  been  made.  Or,  to  give  an  easier 
instance,  suppose  you  have  before  you  the  Twenty- 
third  Psalm  without  vowels — 

TH  LRD  S  M  SHPHRD  I  SHLL  NT  WNT 
H  MKTH  M  T  L  DN  N  GRN  TSTRS 
H  LDTH  M  BSD  TH  STLL  WTRS. 

When  you   have  once  been  tanght  the  true  reading, 


12  SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING. 

if  you  be  ordinarily  familiar  with  the  passage,  you 
will  have  little  or  no  difficulty  in  reading  it  again. 
Nay  more,  though  each  single  word  in  it  is  capable 
of  being  differently  read,  yet  let  the  experiment  be 
tried,  and  you  will  find  it  almost  impossible  to  make 
sense  of  these  three  lines  if  you  put  the  wrong  vowels 
to  even  a  single  word  in  them.  In  Hebrew,  owing 
to  its  fixed  root  meanings,  this  is  much  more  the 
case. 

Of  course  this  is  not  always  so.  Very  often  different 
readings  of  a  word  will  make  equally  good  sense,  and 
this  is  where  the  reader  is  entirely  dependent  on  the 
Jewish  tradition  as  handed  down  to  us  in  the  present 
vowel  points.  There  is  a  good  illustration  in  Gen. 
xlvii.  3 1 ,  where  "  Israel  bowed  himself  on  the  bed's 
heady"  though  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (chap.  xi. 
2i),  quoting  this  verse  from  the  Septuagint  (Greek) 
translation,  makes  him  bow  "  upon  the  top  of  his 
staff."  The  original  word  is  hmtth.  By  the  Hebrews 
it  was  read  H.^MiTTj^H,  the  bed ;  by  the  Greek  trans- 
lators, H^M^TTgH,  the  staff ;  and  it  is  very  hard  to  say 
which  is  the  correct  reading.  Both  make  equally 
good  sense.  Thus  it  will  be  seen  how  mistakes  might 
occur  through  this  method  of  consonant-writing,  and 
the  danger  would,  of  course,  be  much  increased  if  the 
old  Hebrew  manuscripts  were  written,  as  they  probably 
were,  like  the  old  Greek  ones,i  without  any  division 

1  The  mistakes  of  the  Septuagint  translation  in  dividing  what  ought 
to  be  a  single  word,  or  connecting  into  one  words  that  ought  to  be 
separate,  give  several  indications  that  this  was  so ;  yet,  on  the  other 


SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING.  13 

between  the  words.  For  example,  as  if  we  should 
write  in  English  Gen.  i.  i  : — 

NTHBGNNNGGDCRTDTHHVNSNDTHRTH. 

The  difficulty,  however,  is  not  of  much  practical 
importance.  Indeed,  so  little  is  it  felt,  that  to  this 
day  not  only  the  Synagogue- rolls,  but  most  modern 
Jewish  writings,  books,  and  newspapers  are  without 
the  vowel  points,  and  a  Hebrew  scholar  can  read  them 
with  perfect  ease. 

If,  in  addition  to  what  has  been  now  said,  the  reader 
will  keep  in  mind  (i.)  the  scrupulous  care  of  the  Jews 
about  the  accurate  reading  of  their  Scriptures;  (2.) 
the  fact  that,  being  "  people  of  one  book,"  they  were 
many  of  them  as  familiar  with  the  words  of  their  Bible 
as  we  are  with  those  of  the  Lord's  Prayer  and  the 
Creed;  (3.)  and  that,  besides  this,  there  was,  as  we 
shall  see,  a  special  guild  of  scribes,  at  least  from  the 
time  of  Ezra,  to  preserve  and  hand  down  the  correct 
reading,  it  will  be  easily  seen  that  the  danger  from 
Hebrew  consonant-writing  is  by  no  means  as  great  as 
it  appears  at  first  sight. 

IV. 
Grammar  and  Theology. 

It  is  worth  a  short  digression  to  tell  of  the  sharp 
theological    contests    in    Reformation    days    on    this 

hand,  the  Moabite  Stone  and  the  Siloam  inscriptions,  which  are  very 
ancient,  have  the  words  separated  by  little  round  dots  cut  in  the  stone, 
as  may  be  seen  by  examining  frontispiece,  and  the  same  division  exists 
in  the  Pentateuch  of  the  Samaritans, 


14  SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING. 

subject  of  the  Hebrew  vowels.  Nothing  less  would 
suffice  the  Jewish  commentators  and  grammarians  of  the 
time  than  that  these  vowel  marks  had  been  given,  if 
not  to  Adam  in  Paradise,  certainly  to  Moses  on  Mount 
Sinai,  or,  at  the  very  utmost  stretch  of  liberality,  that 
they  had  been  fixed  by  Ezra  and  "  the  men  of  the 
Great  Synagogue."'  "They  were  a  revelation  from 
God  ;  "  "  the  consonant  letters  were  the  body,  and  the 
vowel  points  the  soul,  and  they  move  together  as  an 
army  moves  with  its  leader."  Christian  scholars  knew 
little  about  the  matter,  and  quite  believed  that  the 
vowels  were  as  ancient  as  the  consonants.  We  can 
imagine  then  what  a  sensation  was  produced  when 
Elias  Levita,  a  very  famous  Hebrew  scholar,  about  the 
year  1540,  proved  to  the  world  that  these  vowel 
marks  were  not  in  existence  for  hundreds  of  years 
after  the  time  of  our  Lord  !  ^ 

Here  was  a  new  apple  of  discord  in  the  already 
sufficiently  discordant  field  of  controversy,  whose  noise 
was  filling  the  world  in  those  Eeformation  days.  It 
is  hard  to  seek  the  truth  dispassionately  at  such  times. 
Though  Luther  and  Calvin  held  to  the  old  opinion,  the 
Protestants  in  general  thought  they  saw  a  weapon  for 
themselves  in  Levita's  discovery,  and,  carried  away  by 
their  theological  bias,  they  sided  largely  with  the  new 
doctrine,  and  disclaimed  the  antiquity  of  the  vowel 
points.  Thus  they  considered  they  were  leaving  them- 
selves freer  in  the  interpretation  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, throwing  off  the  tradition  of  the  Eabbis,  as  they 

^  See  footnote,  chap,  viii,  p.  102, 


SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING.  15 

had  already  thrown  off  the  tradition  of  the  Fathers  of 
the  Church. 

All  very  satisfactory  no  doubt  to  the  Reformers.  It 
was  rather  suspicious,  though,  in  the  midst  of  their 
satisfaction,  to  find  that  the  astute  controversialists 
of  Rome  were  quite  as  much  delighted  with  the  new 
theory  as  they  were,  though  for  a  very  different 
reason.  "  Why,"  said  they,  "  it  is  a  conclusive  proof 
of  our  position  against  you  Protestants  as  to  the  use 
of  private  judgment  in  interpreting  the  Bible.  God 
gave  His  inspired  Word  in  that  form  without  vowel 
points,  so  that  none  but  His  appointed  Church  and  its 
accredited  teachers  could  rightly  read  or  understand  it ; 
thus  were  the  vulgar  people  kept  from  reading  it  by 
the  special  providence  of  God,  lest  it  should  be  trodden 
under  foot  of  swine."  "  It  proves,"  said  the  Jesuit 
Morinus,  "  that  without  the  infallible  interpretation  of 
the  Church,  the  Bible  is  but  a  nose  of  wax,  that  may 
be  turned  any  way  by  ignorant  men." 

This  was  indeed  turning  the  tables  with  a  venge- 
ance. Henceforth,  as  may  be  supposed,  the  Reformers 
were  not  quite  so  eager  in  arguing  against  the 
antiquity  and  value  of  the  vowel' points.  The  reader 
will  better  understand  the  merits  of  the  controversy 
after  he  has  read  the  chapters  on  the  story  of  the 
Hebrew  text,  but  it  may  be  well  to  state  here  that 
the  question  is  quite  a  settled  one.  Nobody  now 
dreams  of  doubting  the  comparatively  recent  origin  of 
the  Hebrew  vowel  points. 


l6  SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING. 


Similar  Letters. 

There  is  another  peculiarity  also  to  be  noticed  as 
a  common  cause  of  errors  In  the  Old  Testament.  I 
mean  the  similarity  of  certain  pairs  of  Hebrew  letters. 
Here  are  two  i  •)  which  differ  only  in  the  length  of 
the  tall.  The  first  is  the  letter  Yod,  referred  to  in 
Matt.  V.  1 8,  and  corresponds  to  our  Y.  The  other  is 
the  Hebrew  w.  Clearly,  in  copying  a  long  difficult 
manuscript  one  of  these  letters  might  easily  be  written 
for  the  other.  A  good  Instance  occurs  In  Ps.  xxll.  1 6, 
"They  pierced  my  hands  and  my  feet,"  where  this 
mistake  has  been  the  subject  of  many  a  controversy 
(see  specimen,  p.  204). 

Another  pair  of  these  similar  letters  is  "i  and  "7,  dif- 
fering only  in  the  rounding  of  the  angle.  They  corre- 
spond to  our  R  and  D.  They  are  responsible  for  a  curi- 
ous little  slip,  which  the  Eevlsers  seem  not  to  have 
noticed,  In  Gen.  x.  3,  4,  and  i  Chron.  I.  6,  7.  In  the  first 
we  read  Eiphat  and  Dodanim,  in  the  other  Diphat  and 
Rodanlm.  But,  Indeed,  they  are  responsible  for  a  great 
many  slips.  I  doubt  if  there  is  a  more  mischievous 
pair  of  letters  In  any  alphabet  in  the  world  than  this 
same  pair.  They  are  continually  being  mistaken  one 
for  the  other.  There  is  a  disputed  reading  in  2  Sam. 
vlli.  13,  which  interestingly  exhibits  this  confusion. 
It  tells  of  David  "  smiting  of  Syria  In  the  Valley  of 
Salt    eighteen    thousand    men.      And    he  put  garri- 


SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING.   17 

sons  in  Edom."  Now  this  is  almost  certainly  a 
mistake,  even  though  the  Kevisers  have  not  corrected 
it.  For  the  word  ''Syria"  we  should  read  "Edom." 
The  Valley  of  Salt  was  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Udom, 
not  Syria ;  and  if  we  turn  to  the  parallel  passage  in 
I  Chron.  xviii.  12,  we  read  that  "  Abishai  the  son  of 
Zeruiah  smote  of  Edom  in  the  Valley  of  Salt  eighteen 
thousand  men.  And  he  put  garrisons  in  Edom."  The 
title  also  of  Ps.  Ix.  tells  that  it  was  sung  when  Joab 
returned,  and  smote  Edom  in  the  Valley  of  Salt. 

Now  how  did  this  error  arise  ?  The  words  Syria 
and  Edom  do  not  seem  very  likely  to  be  mistaken  one 
for  the  other. 

But  here  are  the  Hebrew  forms — 

D"!J^  =  A  R^M  =  Syria. 
Uli^  =  A,D,,M  =  Edom. 


■e    0 


It  will  be  seen  how  easily  ''  Edom  "  might  have  become 
"  Syria  "  by  the  scribe  slightly  rounding  the  angle  of 
the  T. 

The  Septuagint  version  has  a  very  curious  instance 
of  this  error.  In  i  Sam.  xix.  13,  where  Michal,  to 
facilitate  her  husband's  escape,  put  an  image  in  the 
bed  and  at  its  head  "  a  pillow  of  goats "  (hair),  the 
Septuagint  translators  have  "  Michal  put  at  his  head 
a  liver  of  goats."  This  shows  that  they  read  Kahlud^ 
a  liver,  instead  of  Kehhir,  a  pillow,  confusing  the  final 
d  and  r.  Curiously  enough,  Josephus^  follows  them 
in  this.      "  Michal,"  he  says,  "  having  let  David  down 

^  Ant.  vi.  II,  4. 

B    ^ 


i8  SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING. 

by  a  cord  out  of  a  window,  fitted  up  a  sick  bed  for 
binij  and  pttt  under  the  hed-clothes  a  goat's  liver,  and 
made  tliem  believe,  by  the  leaping  of  the  liver,  wbicli 
caused  tlie  bed-clothes  to  move  also,  that  David 
breathed  like  an  asthmatic  man !  " 

There  are  also  other  similar  pairs  D  1  k  B,  :i  ^  G  N, 
n  n  H  CH,  any  of  which  might  by  a  little  carelessness 
in  writing  lead  to  a  good  deal  of  confusion ;  i  but  there 
is  no  need  of  illustrating  further. 

I  have  dealt  here  only  with  the  more  modern 
writing,  but  when  it  is  added  that  in  the  ancient 
writing  also  this  similarity  existed  between  certain 
pairs  of  letters,  the  reader  will  understand  how,  in 
the  long  course  of  ages,  errors  might  easily  occur, 
even  with  the  most  anxious  care  about  the  accuracy 
of  the  text. 


VI. 

The  "Guardians  of  the  Lines." 

The  ancient  scribes,  too,  had  a  peculiar  trick  in 
writing  their  manuscripts.  In  our  writing,  if  a  word 
near  the  end  of  the  line  is  too  long,  we  carry  part 
on  to  the  next  line,  with  a  hyphen  connecting.  They 
never  did  that.  If  they  were  near  the  end  of  the 
line,  and  the  next  word  was  a  little  too  long,  they 

^  A  friend  has  just  pointed  out  to  me  an  unintentional  illustration  of 
this  danger  in  the  specimen  of  Hebrew  facing  p.  i,  where  the  printer 
has  put  in  the  bottom  line  ^1'\>  in  mistake  for  ^?"lp  and  two  lines  higher 
up  inX  instead  of  1T\^  being  misled  by  the  similarity  of  the  middle 
letters.     I  leave  the  error  uncorrected. 


SOME  PECULIARITIES  OF  HEBREW  WRITING.  19 

took  it  down  unbroken  to  the  line  below.  But  it 
would  not  do  to  leave  the  blank  thus  caused  at  the 
end  of  the  line.  So  they  filled  it  up  with  some  other 
letters,  usually  those  at  the  beginning  of  the  long 
word  that  had  been  moved  down.  These  letters  are 
called  the  "  Guardians  of  the  Lines."  There  was  just 
a  chance,  of  course,  that  a  stupid  copyist  might  some- 
times blunder  over  these,  especially  if  the  letters 
could  by  any  possibility  be  mistaken  for  any  part  of 
the  previous  word,  and  so  errors  might  arise  in  the 
manuscripts. 

Sometimes  also  a  word  of  frequent  occurrence  was 
abbreviated  by  writing  only  the  first  letters,  with  a 
few  small  dashes  after  it  to  mark  the  abbreviation. 
As,  for  example,  the  word  yehovah  appeared  some- 
times as  y.  The  Septuagint  version  was  thus  led 
into  a  mistake  in  translating  Jer.  vi.  11,  where  it 
found  CHAMATH  YEHOVAH,  "  the  wrath  of  Jehovah," 
contracted  into  chamath  y''.  This  is  very  like  the 
form  CHAMATHY,  which  means  "my  wrath,"  and  they 
accordingly  so  translate  it. 


CHAPTER  III. 

WHAT  IS  BIBLICAL  CRITICISM? 

I. 

Mistakes  in  the  iVIanuscripts. 

The  sources  of  error  mentioned  in  tlie  previous 
chapter  are  peculiar  to  the  Old  Testament  manuscripts. 
But  besides  those,  they  were  exposed  to  other  sources 
of  error,  in  common  with  all  manuscripts  that  have 
been  extensively  copied.  However  careful  the  scribe 
may  be,  it  is  almost  impossible  in  copying  any  long 
difficult  manuscript  to  escape  errors  of  various  kinds. 
Sometimes  he  will  mistake  one  word  for  another  that 
looks  very  like  it ;  sometimes,  if  having  the  manuscript 
read  to  him,  he  will  confound  two  words  of  similar 
sound ;  sometimes,  after  writing  in  the  last  word  of  a 
line  or  period,  on  looking  up  again,  his  eye  will  catch 
the  same  word  at  the  end  of  the  next  line  or  period, 
and  he  will  go  on  from  that,  omitting  the  whole  pas- 
sage between.  This  last  is  a  very  frequent  fault. 
Eemarks  and  explanations,  too,  written  in  the  margin, 
will  sometimes  in  transcribing  get  inserted  in  the  text. 

Again,  in  ancient  manuscripts,  where  there  is  often 
no  division  between  the  words,  each  line  presenting  a 


WHAT  IS  BIBLICAL  CRITICISM?  21 

continuous  row  of  letters,  it  might  easily  happen  that 
one  word  would  be  wrongly  divided  into  two,  or  two 
combined  into  one,  as  in  the  old  story  of  the  infidel 
who  wrote  over  his  bed  ''  God  is  nowhere,"  which  was 
read  by  his  little  boy  as  "  God  is  now  here."  For 
example,  in  the  end  of  Ps.  xlviii.  14,  ''This  God  is 
our  God  for  ever  and  ever:  He  will  be  our  guide 
unto  death,"  some  Hebrew  manuscripts  have  iil-mth  = 
wito  death,  others  hlmth  =for  ever. 

There  is  no  need  of  further  pursuing  this  subject. 
The  reader  who  remembers  his  own  frequent  slips  and 
erasures,  even  in  writing  an  ordinary  short  letter,  will 
easily  think  of  many  ways  besides  in  which  errors 
may  arise,  and  will  see  at  once  the  improbability  of 
the  Old  Testament  manuscripts  having  escaped  abso- 
lutely flawless  through  a  transmission  of  thousands  of 
years.  If,  even  with  all  the  advantages  of  the  print- 
ing-press and  its  multitudes  of  trained  proof-readers, 
many  discrepancies  exist  between  the  different  editions 
of  our  Authorised  Version,  how  can  we  wonder  that 
it  should  be  so  when  every  copy  had  to  be  made  by  the 
slow  laborious  process  of  writing  it  out  letter  by  letter  ? 

True,  God  might  have  quite  obviated  this  danger. 
He  might  have  miraculously  preserved  the  original 
autographs  of  the  inspired  writers  as  a  standard  by 
which  copies  could  be  corrected  for  ever,  or  He  might 
have  directed  the  minds  and  fingers  of  Bible-copyists 
before  printing  was  invented,  and  of  printers  and 
compositors  in  after  days,  so  as  to  secure  this  perfect 
transmission.      If  He  had  seen  fit  thus  to  make  fallible 


22  WHAT  IS  BIBLICAL  CRITICISM? 

men  infallible,  of  course  He  could  have  done  so.  But 
it  does  not  seem  to  be  God's  way  anywhere  to  work 
miracles  for  men  where  their  own  careful  use  of  the 
abilities  He  has  given  would  suffice  for  the  purpose. 
And  the  Old  Testament  text  is  no  exception  to  this 
rule.  We  shall  find,  as  we  go  on,  that  never  was  a 
book  guarded  with  such  scrupulous  awe  and  reverence  ; 
never  did  any  writing  come  down  through  the  ages  so 
pure  as  we  have  reason  to  believe  did  our  Hebrew 
Bible ;  but  that  it  has  come  to  us  word  for  word  as  it 
left  the  hands  of  the  inspired  writers  long  ago,  the 
evidence  will  by  no  means  allow  us  to  believe. 

II. 
Biblical  Criticism. 

Biblical  criticism  is  the  science  which  deals  with 
the  discovering  and  correcting  of  these  errors  in  the 
text.  To  be  accurate,  it  should  rather  be  called  Textual 
Criticism,  for  of  course  it  deals  equally  with  the  text  of 
any  manuscript,  whether  Biblical  or  not,  and  I  shall 
generally  use  this  more  accurate  term  in  future.^  The 
reader  must  not  be  frightened  at  the  hard  name  of 
this  science,  as  if  it  meant  something  abstruse  and 
difficult  to  understand.  It  may  sometimes  mean  what 
is  very  simple  indeed,  and  instances  of  it  may  occur  even 
in  the  reading  of  the  daily  newspaper.  For  example, 
I  remember  somewhere  reading  of  a  naval  pensioners' 
banquet,  at  which  the  toast  was  proposed,  "  That  the 

^  I  retain  the  name  Biblical  Criticism  on  the  title-pages  and  some 
other  places,  where  the  more  technical  expression  would  be  inadvisable. 


WHAT  IS  BIBLICAL  CRITICISM?  23 

man  who  has  lost  one  eye  in  the  service  of  his  country 
may  never  see  with  the  other."  Well,  it  did  not 
require  much  cleverness  to  suspect  a  mistake  here,  and 
to  think  of  examining  another  account,  and  find  that 
the  word  "  distress "  or  some  such  word  had  been 
omitted  from  the  text.  Yet  this  was  an  operation  in 
textual  criticism,  though  certainly  an  operation  of  the 
most  simple  kind.-^  One  rather  like  it  in  the  Bible,  but 
very  much  more  difficult,  occurred  in  the  revision  of  the 
well-known  First  Lesson  for  Christmas  Day  (Isa.  ix.). 
The  old  reading  is  (verse  3),  ^'Thou  hast  multiplied  the 
nation  ,and  7iot  increased  the  joy  ;  they  joy  before  Thee 
according  to  the  joy  in  harvest,"  &c.  Now,  in  a  jubilant 
passage  of  this  kind,  the  "not  increased  their  joy" 
rather  jars  on  one,  and  this  fact  led  to  the  examining 
of  a  great  many  old  manuscripts  and  versions  of  Isaiah, 
when  it  was  found  by  the  Eevisers  that  the  word  "  not " 
was  most  probably  a  copyist's  mistake  (see  specimen, 
Book  iii.  p.  206). 

But   the   operations   of   textual    criticism    are    not 

^  To  give  a  more  commonplace  example  still.  The  writer  iiad  a 
rather  amusing  experience  in  textual  criticism  a  few  days  since,  while 
travelling  in  a  railway- carriage  from  Dublin  to  Kingstown.  Eight 
over  the  carriage-window  was  the  printed  direction,  "  ait  until  the 
PAIN  STOPS !"  It  looked  Irish  to  be  sure,  but  somehow  did  not  seem  a 
very  probable  direction  to  have  been  issued  by  a  solemn  board  of  rail- 
way directors.  A  very  slight  examination  showed  that  a  letter,  W, 
had  been  lost  before  the  first  word,  and  a  T  before  the  fourth ;  and 
furthermore,  it  soon  became  evident  that  the  P  of  this  word  PAIN  was 
originally  an  K,  whose  tail  had  been  erased  by  some  mischievous  school- 
boy for  a  tempting  emendation  of  the  reading.  And  so  the  extra- 
ordinary legend  resolved  itself  into  the  very  prosaic  advice  "wait 
UNTIL  THE  tkain  STOPS  ; "  but  the  process  of  thus  recovering  the  correct 
reading  was  a  true  process  of  textual  criticism. 


24  WHAT  IS  BIBLICAL  CRITICISM? 

always  by  any  means  so  simple  as  this.  Sometimes 
the  highest  skill  of  the  most  experienced  critics  is 
utterly  at  fault.  And  even  in  cases  like  those  given 
above,  simple  as  they  seem,  the  making  of  such  correc- 
tions is  often  a  very  dangerous  experiment.  For  an 
expression  may  seem  to  the  critic  incongruous  or  im- 
probable through  his  misapprehending  the  thought 
that  was  in  the  writer  s  mind.  If,  then,  he  should 
find  a  number  of  ancient  manuscripts  which,  owing 
to  the  same  misapprehension,  have  ventured  to  so  alter 
the  passage  that  it  agrees  with  his  view,  he  is  clearly 
in  danger  of  being  confirmed  in  his  mistake. 

Thus  it  will  be  seen  textual  criticism  needs  to  be 
wisely  and  cautiously  used.  It  is  an  "  edge  tool," 
which,  the  proverb  says,  children  and  fools  must  not 
play  with — many  such  have  played  with  it  to  the  sore 
disfiguring  of  their  work — but  which  in  the  hands  of 
the  skilful  workman  may  do  much,  and  has  done 
much,  especially  during  the  past  century,  in  removing 
blemishes  from  the  Bible  text.  In  applying  to  the 
Bible,  it  requires  a  calm  judicial  mind,  reverent  towards 
God's  Word,  skilled  in  the  accurate  weifrhinor  of 
evidence,  and  through  long  study  of  manuscripts  well 
acquainted  with  the  many  ways  in  which  copyists' 
errors  are  likely  to  arise. 

III. 
Its  Axioms  and  Rules. 

Its  rules,  even  when  they  seem  to  the  uninitiated 
difficult  and  unreasonable,  are  simply  the  conclusions 


WHAT  IS  BIBLICAL  CRITICISM?  25 

of  common  sense  founded  on  a  special  knowledge  of 
the  subject.  For  example,  that  in  certain  cases  where 
we  have  to  decide  between  two  different  readings  of 
a  passage,  "  the  more  difficult  reading  is  to  he  ;pref erred 
to  the  easier,  "  merely  means  that  experience  of  manu- 
scripts has  taught  the  critic  that  copyists  are  more 
likely  to  try  to  simplify  a  difficult  passage  than  to 
complicate  one  that  already  runs  freely  and  easily,  and 
therefore  the  more  difficult  reading  is  likely  to  be 
the  correct  one.'^  So  also  the  rule  that  "  the  shorter 
of  tiuo  readings  is  to  he  preferred  to  the  more  wordy l' 
means  only  that  experience  has  likewise  taught  that 
copyists  are  more  inclined  to  expand  a  short  terse 
reading  than  to  condense  a  more  wordy  one. 

For  our  present  inquiry  it  is  only  necessary  to 
trouble  the  reader  with  three  very  simple  and  self- 
evident  propositions  of  textual  criticism : — 

( I .)  If  manuscripts  ivere  all  of  equal  value,  the  truth 
might  he  expected,  of  course,  to  he  with  the  majority — 
e.g.,  if  out  of  seventy  manuscripts,  sixty  contained  a 
certain  reading  and  ten  omitted  it,  that  reading  would 
probably  be  correct. 

(2.)  But  manuscripts  are  not  all  of  the  same  value. 
For  illustration,  let  o  represent  the  original  document, 

^  For  example,  I  am  informed  that  in  the  hymn  *'  Rock  of  Ages," 
the  line  "  when  mine  eyelids  close  in  death "  reads  in  some  copies 
"when  mine  eyestrings  burst  in  death."  This  is  clearly  the  more 
"difficult"  reading,  but  for  that  reason  it  is  the  most  likely  to  be  the 
original  one,  since  nobody  would  be  likely  to  alter  the  other  for  such 
an  unpleasant  reading,  but  any  one  might  be  tempted  to  change  it  for 
the  other. 


26  WHAT  IS  BIBLICAL  CRITICISM? 

and  A   and   B   copies   of  equal   value   made   from   it. 

Now  suppose  three  copies  further  to  be  made  from  B, 

and  from  these  again  any  numbers  of  others.      It  is 

clear  that  the  evidence  of  the  one  copy,  A,  would  be 

worth  that  of  the  whole  set,  c,  d,  e,  I,  2,  3,  4,  5,  6,  7, 

copies  descended  from  b. 
o 

I 


|c       |d      |e 


11  I  I  I  I  I 

12  34567. 

(3.)  The  earlier  any  manuscript,  the  more  liMy  it 
is  to  he  correct.  For  in  the  many  ways  we  have 
referred  to  it  is  possible  for  errors  to  creep  into  the 
first  copy  of  a  manuscript.  Any  such  errors  would,  of 
course,  be  repeated  by  the  man  that  afterwards  copied 
from  this,  who  would  also  sometimes  add  other  errors  of 
his  own.  This  would  be  equally  true  of  the  man  who 
copied  from  him,  and  so  on  all  the  way  down.  So  that 
clearly  as  copies  increased  errors  would  be  likely  to 
increase  with  them,  and  therefore,  as  a  general  rule, 
the  earlier  manuscripts  would  be  the  more  correct  ones.'^ 

IV. 

Its  Working  Material. 

The  evidence  on  which  the  textual  criticism  of  the 
Old  Testament  chiefly  bases  its  judgments  I  have 
roughly  divided  into  two  parts  : — 

1  Of  course  this  is  only  a  general  rule.  It  is  quite  possible  that  a 
manuscript  of  the  present  year  should  be  copied  direct  from  one  1500 
years  old,  and  therefore  be  more  correct  than  many  which  have  existed 
for  centuries. 


WHAT  IS  BIBLICAL  CRITICISM?  27 

I.  The  Old  Hebrew  Manuscripts,  i.e.,  copies  of 
the  Sacred  Books  made  in  the  original  language. 
These  are  the  foundation  on  which  everything  rests. 

II.  The  Other  Old  Documents  to  aid  in  the 
testing  and  correcting  of  these  manuscripts.  Under 
this  head  come — (i.)  The  Ancient  Versions,  i.e.,  the 
translations  of  the  Hebrew  books  into  other  languages 
long  ago.  (2.)  The  quotations  from  the  Bible  in 
ancient  Jewish  commentaries,  to  which  we  may  add 
the  earlier  printed  editions  of  the  Hebrew  Bible,  made 
perhaps  from  older  manuscripts  than  any  that  have 
survived. 

Accordingly  this  volume  is  divided  into  three  parts — 

Book  I.  The  "  Old  Hebrew  Documents,"  and  the  ques- 
tion of  Biblical  Criticism. 

Book  II.  The  "  Other  Old  Documents,"  and  their  aid 
in  Biblical  Criticism. 

Book  III.  The  New  Bible  a  specimen  of  Biblical 
Criticism,  to  illustrate  how  the  above 
materials  are  used  in  removing  blem- 
ishes from  the  Bible  text. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

A   VIEW  OF  THE  OLD  MANUSCRIPTS. 


Some  Curious  Old  Manuscripts. 

We  are  now  in  a  position  to  glance  at  the  old 
Hebrew  manuscripts  of  the  Bible  at  present  available  to 
scholars.  There  are  very  many  of  them — nearly  two 
thousand  have  already  been  examined — strange  and  curi- 
ous old  documents,  on  rough  cumbrous  hides,  on  brown 
African  skins,  on  rolls  of  the  most  delicate  parchment, 
some  of  them  mildewed  and  faded  and  torn,  some 
almost  as  fresh  as  on  the  day  when  they  were  made. 
From  all  quarters  of  the  earth  they  come,  from  Pales- 
tine and  Babylon  and  the  distant  East,  from  Africa 
and  the  islands  of  the  Indian  Sea,  from  the  great 
universities  and  libraries  of  the  Gentiles,  from  the 
filthy  Jewish  Ghettos  in  Italy  and  Spain.  There  are 
the  fine  synagogue  parchments,  with  their  exquisite 
writing  wrought  out  with  continual  fasting  and  prayer  ; 
here  the  curious  manuscripts  of  the  Rabbis  of  China, 
and  the  rough  red  goatskin  rolls  from  the  black  Jews 
of  Malabar ;  -^  piles  of  shrivelled  fragments  of  only  a 

^  In  the  early  times  there  were  Jewish  settlements  in  India  and 
China,  and  Hebrew  scholars  often  turned  their  attention  in  that  direc- 


I 


If. 

Ml- 
^  f 


n 


s  ^ 


A   VIEW  OF  THE  OLD  MANUSCRIPTS.  29 

few  pages,  and  rough  leatliern  rolls  150  feet  long; 
beautiful  book-sliaped  copies  of  the  Law,  and  soiled  and 
faded  sheets  of  the  Prophets  and  the  Psalms,  disinterred 
from  the  "  Ghenizas,"  where  the  Jews  had  buried  them. 
Many  a  romantic  story  doubtless  belongs  to  the 
history  of  these  silent  sheets  and  the  names  of  the 
forgotten  writers,  which  some  of  them  bear.  Stories 
of  battle  and  siege,  as  of  the  capture  of  Toledo  by 
Edward  the  Black  Prince,  where  the  famous  ^'  Codex 
Ezrse  "  ^  was  found  amongst  the  spoils ;  stories  of  life 
in  the  old  Jewish  academies  long  ago ;  stories  of  fierce 
persecution,  of  brave  endurance ;  of  men  fleeing  with 
their  scriptures  from  the  "  followers  of  Christ ; "  of 
holocausts  of  ancient  Jewish  manuscripts  of  the  Bible ; 
of  blazing  synagogues  and  ruined  homes, 

"  And  dead  white  faces  upturned  to  the  sky. 
Calling  for  vengeance  to  their  fathers'  God." 

tion.  In  1806  Dr.  Buchanan  obtained,  among  other  manuscripts,  a 
roll  of  the  Pentateuch  from  the  black  Jews  of  Malabar.  It  is  now  in 
the  University  Library  at  Cambridge.  It  consists  of  about  thirty-five 
goatskins  dyed  red.  It  is  the  breadth  of  the  Jewish  sacred  cubit,  and 
when  complete  must  have  been  nearly  ninety  feet  long. 

^  The  Jews  of  Toledo,  in  the  Middle  Ages,  had  in  their  synagogues 
a  roll  called  the  Codex  Ezrse,  or  the  Codex  Azarse.  Some  believed  it 
to  have  belonged  to  Ezra  ;  others  thought  it  was  the  copy  deposited  in 
the  Azara  or  Hall  of  the  Temple  (see  p.  81),  and  preserved  in  the  siege 
and  capture  of  Jerusalem.  At  the  capture  of  Toledo  by  Edward  the 
Black  Prince  in  1367,  it  came  into  his  possession  as  part  of  the  spoils, 
The  Jews  redeemed  it  for  a  large  sum,  but  it  was  afterwards  destroyed 
by  lire  with  the  synagogue.  So  highly  was  it  valued,  that  manuscripts 
were  sent  from  all  places  to  be  compared  with  it,  and  some  of  our 
existing  manuscripts  have  appended  to  them  a  certificate  that  they 
have  been  compared,  not  directly  with  the  Codex  Ezrae  itself,  but  with 
manuscripts  that  had  been  verified  by  comparison  with  it. 


30  A   VIEW  OF  THE  OLD  MANUSCRIPTS. 

But  the  very  existence  itself  of  these  manuscripts 
has  sufficient  in  it  of  wonder  and  romance.  They  are 
the  holy  oracles  of  God  written  in  the  "  holy  tongue  " 
of  His  people,  faithfully  handed  down  from  generation 
to  generation  since  the  days  of  the  thunderings  and 
lightnings  of  Sinai.  Yv^ho  can  look  on  them  without 
reverence  and  awe  and  deep  conviction  of  the  truth 
of  revelation  ?  Who  can  think  without  emotion  of  that 
poor,  despised,  hunted  race,  through  all  the  ages  pre- 
serving for  their  persecutors  the  message  of  Jehovah  ? 
Surely  enough  of  wonder  and  romance  that  those 
records  should  have  come  down  to  us  from  the  days  of 
Moses ;  that  in  this  world  of  shortlived  races,  rapidly 
succeeding  each  other  and  passing  away,  there  should 
remain  one  mysterious  people  existing  to  this  day  from 
the  dawn  of  history,  the  guardians  through  thirty  cen- 
turies of  the  words  in  those  old  Hebrew  scrolls ! 


II. 

A  Perplexing  Discovery. 

But  what  is  the  value  to  the  textual  critic  of  these 
venerable  documents  ?  How  many  thousand  years  do 
they  go  back  ?  Have  we  amongst  them  the  autograph 
of  any  inspired  writer?  Have  we  manuscripts  at 
least  of  the  time  of  our  Lord  ?  How  far  do  they 
enable  us  to  fix  with  certainty  the  exact  original  of 
the  Hebrew  Old  Testament  ? 

To  the  reader  who  knows  something  of  the  New 
Testament  writings,  with  their  documents  reaching  up 


A   VIEW  OF  THE  OLD  MANUSCRIPTS.  31 

near  the  days  of  the  Apostles,  and  the  many  variations 
nevertheless  existing  in  the  text,  an  acquaintance  with 
these  strange  old  manuscripts  can  scarcely  fail  to  cause 
surprise.  Not  one  of  them,  we  shall  see  immediately, 
is  written  in  the  ancient  writing.  This,  perhaps,  he 
might  have  expected  from  what  has  been  already  said. 
But,  as  he  inquires  further,  a  very  perplexing  fact 
indeed  reveals  itself.     He  finds — 

I.  That  the  oldest  Hebrew  manuscript  in  exist- 
ence IS  OF  date  little  earlier  than  William  the 
Conqueror ! 

II.  And  that   in   all  the  Hebrew  manuscripts 

THAT  HAVE  EVER  BEEN  EXAMINED,  THE  TEXT  IS  ALMOST 
WORD  FOR  WORD  THE  SAME  ! 

Let  us  realise  what  this  means,  (i.)  That  of  the 
early  Old  Testament  books,  written  more  than  3000 
years  ago,  we  have  not  a  single  copy  1000  years  old ; 
or,  in  other  words,  that  the  earliest  Old  Testament 
manuscript  in  existence  is  as  far  from  the  time  of  the 
original  writers  as  would  be  a  New  Testament  manu- 
script written  to-day.  (2.)  That  amid  all  the  copyists' 
errors  and  variations,  which  are  the  common  fate  of 
every  ancient  book — the  New  Testament  included — 
this  most  ancient  of  all  the  books  of  the  world  has 
virtually  no  variations  at  all ! 

III. 
The  Guardianship  of  the  Bible. 

Now,  how  are  these  strange  phenomena  to  be 
explained?     This   question   will   be   fully  treated   in 


32  A   VIEW  OF  THE  OLD  MANUSCRIPTS. 

the  following  story  of  the  manuscripts,  but  a  brief 
summary  of  the  answer  here  will  perhaps  enable  the 
reader  to  follow  it  more  intelligently.  The  popular 
notion  is  that  of  an  absolutely  perfect  guardianship  of 
the  Hebrew  text  by  the  Jews.  Their  deep  reverence 
for  their  Scriptures  and  the  scrupulous  care  with 
which  these  Scriptures  were  handed  down  is  considered 
quite  sufficient  explanation  for  this  marvellous  agree- 
ment of  manuscripts.  Well,  there  is  much  truth  in 
this,  a  good  deal  more,  we  venture  to  say,  than  is 
believed  by  many  of  those  who  question  the  accuracy 
of  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament.  We  shall  see  as  we 
go  on  that  for  nearly  2000  years  past  at  least  this 
guardianship  was  almost  perfect ;  scarcely  a  single 
important  slip  of  a  transcriber  could  have  occurred 
without  detection  in  all  the  copying  of  manuscripts 
during  that  time.  But  we  cannot  speak  thus  con- 
fidently of  the  manuscripts  of  the  earlier  period.  They 
certainly  were  not  all  uniform.  The  manuscripts  used 
by  the  Palestine  Jews  varied,  often  considerably,  from 
those  of  the  "  Jews  of  the  Dispersion  "  in  other  lands. 
The  Palestine  manuscripts  themselves  had  some  varia- 
tions between  them.  Therefore  some  better  explana- 
tion must  be  found  for  the  uniformity  in  the  existing 
Hebrew  manuscripts. 

IV. 

An  Ancient  Revision. 

We  must  first  clearly  distinguish  between  the  Pales- 
tine manuscripts  and  all  others.      The  Palestine  text 


A   VIEW  OF  THE  OLD  MANUSCRIPTS.  33 

is  that  which  has  come  down  to  us,  and,  as  will  bo 
seen,  we  have  every  reason  to  consider  that  it  has 
come  down  to  us  substantially  correct.  We  do  not 
believe  that  it  is  entirely  free  from  copyists'  errors, 
but  from  what  we  know  of  the  solemn  reverence  with 
which  it  has  been  always  regarded  from  the  beginning, 
and  the  scrupulous,  almost  superstitious  care  with 
which  it  has  been  transmitted  for  the  past  two  thousand 
years,  we  have  ample  reason  to  believe  that  this  Pales- 
tine Old  Testament  has  come  down  to  us  very  nearly 
as  it  left  the  hands  of  the  original  writers. 

This,  however,  does  not  sufficiently  account  for  the 
almost  word-for-word  agreement  between  our  existing 
manuscripts,  since,  as  we  have  seen,  even  the  Palestine 
manuscripts  in  ancient  times  were  not  without  some 
variation.  Unless  by  a  continual  miracle,  no  writings 
could  have  passed  through  the  process  of  copying 
and  recopying  for  thousands  of  years  without  many 
an  error  and  variation  arising. 

The  explanation  is  by  no  means  easy  to  find.  The 
following  chapters  will  tell  of  a  long  continual  revision 
carried  on  through  many  centuries  by  the  ablest  Jewish 
scholars  ;  of  a  mysterious  standard  text  set  up,  to  which 
every  manuscript  conformed ;  of  the  existence  of  all 
Hebrew  Bibles  in  the  famous  "  days  of  the  Massoretes  " 
in  this  uniform  state  in  which  they  appear  to-day. 
This  uniform  text  was  then  fixed  and  stereotyped  as 
the  "  Textus  Eeceptus "  or  standard  text  of  the  Old 
Testament.  It  is  known  as  the  "Massoretic"  text, 
and  our  manuscripts  are  all  "  Massoretic  "  manuscripts. 


34  A   VIEW  OF  THE  OLD  MANUSCRIPTS. 

It  is  well  for  the  reader  to  remember  this  name.  We 
have  much  to  say  of  it  afterwards  in  the  "  Story  of  the 
Manuscripts." 


The  Vanished  Manuscripts. 

But  what  of  the  disappearance  of  the  very  ancient 
manuscripts  ?  Why  have  we  none  even  a  thousand 
years  old  ?  If  divergent  copies  once  existed,  why  is 
there  not  one  to  be  found  to-day  to  break  the  uni- 
formity of  the  Massoretic  text  ?  It  is  generally  an- 
swered that  the  Jews  destroyed  all  copies  that  varied 
from  the  standard  Massoretic  Bible.  And  this  may 
well  have  been  so.  We  know  that  in  a  like  case, 
when  the  Caliph  Othman  adopted  a  standard  text  of 
the  Koran,  he  destroyed  every  copy  that  differed  from 
it.  The  text  of  the  Vedas,  too,  in  India,  appears  to 
have  been  revised  about  five  hundred  years  before 
Christ,  and  no  divergent  copy  allowed  afterwards  to 
remain.  This  may  have  happened  in  the  case  of  the 
ancient  Jewish  manuscripts. 

But  there  is  really  no  need  of  postulating  such  a 
cause.  Why  should  they  not  have  vanished  as  Jewish 
manuscripts  are  continually  vanishing  now  ?  If  the 
present  Jewish  customs  existed  long  ago,  they  must 
have  made  the  survival  of  any  very  ancient  manuscript 
well  nigh  impossible.  Even  those  which  we  possess 
to-day  have  only  escaped  through  having  fallen  into 
Gentile  hands.      It  is  a  rigid  rule  to  this  day  among 


•N>„-;^-.>--'2^ 


"O-SW!- 


PART   OP   THE   ILLUMINATED   TITLES   OF   THE   BOOKS   OF  ECCLESIASTES   AND   NUMBERS. 

From  a  Fifteenth  Century  Hebrew  Manuscript. 

On  the  reverse  of  the  last  leaf  is  written  this  deed  of  sale  :— "To  testify  and  make  it 
appear  to  Rabbi  Jachiel,  the  son  nf  Uri,  1  acknowledge  that  I  have  delivered  to  him  this 
Pentateuch,  of  which  I  have  received  the  value  in  ready  money,  and  the  sale  thereof  is  an 
everlasting  sale.  Done  tliis  4th  day,  the  28th  of  tlie  month  Ejar,  a.m.  5229.  The  words  of 
Jacob  the  son  of  Mordecai." 


To  face  page  34.] 


A   VIEW  OF  THE  OLD  MANUSCRIPTS.  35 

the  Jews  that  manuscripts  condemned  from  any  cause 
as  unfit  for  use  must  be  forthwith  reverently  destroyed 
lest  they  should  fall  into  the  hands  of  the  profane. 
Now,  manuscripts  were  condemned  for  very  slight 
defects ;  a  new  sheet  if  there  were  found  in  it  three 
errors  of  the  scribe,  a  synagogue  roll  if  injured  through 
the  wear  and  tear  of  rolling  and  unrolling  for  the 
daily  lessons,  or  if  letters  were  blurred  or  effaced 
through  the  custom  of  kissing  the  opening  and  closing 
words  of  the  portion  to  be  read.  A  ^'  Gheniza  "  was 
usually  attached  to  the  synagogue,  a  place  where 
these  condemned  manuscripts  were  reverently  buried ; 
though,  by  the  way,  this  did  not  always  save  them 
from  defilement,  for  it  appears  from  the  Catalogues  that 
at  least  two  decayed  old  parchments  in  the  library  of 
the  great  Hebrew  scholar,  De  Eossi,  were  unearthed  at 
Lucca  from  one  of  these  Ghenizas. 


VI. 

Are  our  Manuscripts  Correct? 

In  any  case,  however  we  explain  the  disappearance 
of  the  ancient  copies,  one  thing  is  clear,  that,  as  far  as 
Hebrew  manuscripts  are  concerned,  we  are  shut  up  to 
this  Massoretic  text.  We  have  no  other.  The  makers 
of  the  Authorised  Version  simply  translate  it,  with  rarely 
any  question  of  its  absolute  correctness.  The  recent 
revisers,  while  expressing  their  doubts,  think  it  "  most 
prudent  to  adopt  the  Massoretic  text  as  the  basis  of 
their  work,  and  to  depart  from  it,  as  the  Authorised 


36  A   VIEW  OF  THE  OLD  MANUSCRIPTS. 

translators  had  done,  only  in  exceptional  cases."  There- 
fore it  becomes  a  most  important  question,  How  far  do 
these  Massoretic  manuscripts  correctly  reproduce  the 
very  words  of  the  Old  Testament  writers,  and  where 
they  fail  in  so  doing  is  there  any  means  of  discovering 
and  correcting  their  errors  ?  The  answer  to  this  ques- 
tion also,  as  far  as  it  can  be  given,  must  be  gathered 
from  the  following  ''  Story  of  the  Manuscripts." 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

THE    EARLY    AGES. 


What  can  we  Learn  of  the  Vanished  Manuscripts? 

The  first  trace  of  the  documents  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  found  in  Exod.  xvii.  14,  where,  after  the  battle 
with  Amalek,  we  are  told  that  Moses  was  commanded 
to  "  Avrite  it  in  a  book,"  either  the  original  manuscript 
of  part  of  the  Pentateuch  or  one  of  the  sources  from 
which  the  Pentateuch  was  afterwards  compiled.'^  It  is 
a  "  far  cry  "  from  that  manuscript  of  Rephidim,  three 
thousand  years  ago,  to  the  Hebrew  documents  in  our 
hands  to-day.      We  have  to  learn  now  what  is  known 

^  There  is  no  doubt  that  many  previously  existing  documents  were 
used  in  the  composition  of  the  Old  Testament  books,  the  Genealogies, 
the  *'  Book  of  the  Wars  of  Jehovah,"  the  "  Book  of  Iddo,"  the  "Book  of 
Jasher,"  the  "  Chronicles  of  the  Kings  of  Judah  and  Israel,"  &c.  But 
the  discussion  of  this  question,  deeply  interesting  as  it  is,  lies  quite 
outside  our  present  plan.  The  reader  will  clearly  understand  that  this 
little  book  deals  only  with  the  external  history  of  the  Jewish  Bible,  i.e., 
the  preservation  and  transmission  of  the  books  as  they  have  come  down 
to  us.  With  their  composition  and  internal  history,  and  the  whole 
fascinating  but  difficult  question  of  what  is  called  the  "  higher  criti- 
cism," we  have  nothincr  to  do  here. 


38  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

of  the  history  of  the   text   during   all  the   centuries 
between. 

It  is  but  very  little,  reader,  that  there  is  to  learn, 
especially  of  the  earlier  ages,  and  even  that  little  can 
be  but  lightly  touched  on  in  a  simple  popular  treatise 
such  as  the  present.  We  may  roughly  divide  the 
history  into  four  periods  : — 

I.  The  Early  Ages,  from  Moses  to  Ezra,  i.e.,  to 
about  B.C.  500. 

II.  Ezra  and  the  Scribes,  to  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  A.D.  70. 

III.  The  Talmud  Period,  to  about  a.d.  500. 

IV.  The  Days  of  the  Massorets,  to  a.d.  iooo. 

Let  us  try  to  investigate  the  subject  by  examining 
the  text  as  far  as  we  can  at  each  period  of  its  history. 
First,  then,  we  inquire,  At  the  close  of  the  ''  Early  Ages  " 
did  all  the  copies  agree  in  every  letter,  and  was  the 
text  absolutely  correct  as  it  left  the  hands  of  the  in- 
spired writers  ? 

II. 
Call  our  First  Witness— The  Sacred  Books. 

Of  this  first  period  little  is  known  except  what  we 
can  learn  from  the  books  themselves.  There  are  no 
manuscripts  of  that  period  remaining,  no  history,  no 
collateral  sources  of  information,  except  perhaps  the 
Samaritan  Pentateuch,  to  be  afterwards  examined. 

What,  then,  we  inquire,  can  be  learned  from  the 
books  themselves  ?     What  of  the  text  of  these  vanished 


THE  EARLY  AGES.  39 

manuscripts  ?  Did  it  agree  exactly  with  that  which 
has  come  down  to  us  ?  Was  it  carefully  guarded  from 
corruption  of  copyists  ?  And  the  little  that  we  can 
gather  of  an  answer  to  our  question  is  something  to 
this  effect : — 

The  manuscripts  were  written  in  the  ancient  Hebrew 
writing  on  rolls  of  linen  or  papyrus,  or  skins  fastened 
together,  much  like  the  present  parchment  rolls  of  the 
synagogue.      [We   read,  for   example,  of  the  Eoll  of 
the  Book  (Ps.  xl.  7),  Jeremiah's  Eoll  (Jer.  xxxvi.  14), 
and  the  Flying  Eoll  of  Zechariah's  vision  (Zech.  v.  i).] 
They    were    guarded    with  'the    most    reverent    care, 
especially  the  Mosaic  writings,  the  only  Bible  which 
the  Jews  possessed  for  centuries.      Moses,  we  are  told, 
committed  his  original  manuscript  "  unto  the  priests, 
the  sons  of  Levi,  which  bare  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant, 
and  unto  all  the  elders  of  Israel ;  and  he  commanded 
the  Levites  to  take  the  book,  and  to  put  it  by  (not  in) 
the  side  of  the  Ark  of  the  Covenant,  to  be  there  for  a 
witness  against  the  people  of  Israel "  (Deut.  xxxi.  9, 
24,  26).      It  was  preserved,  therefore,  in  the  Holy  of 
Holies,  guarded  by  the  awful  majesty  of  God's  visible 
presence.      Every  seven  years  this  ''  Book  of  the  Law  " 
was  to  be   read   before  the  people ;   and  in  Joshua's 
days  we  learn  (Joshua  viii.  35)  that  'Hhere  was  not  a 
word  of  all  that  Moses  commanded  which  Joshua  read 
not  before  all  the  congregation."      Further,  it  was  en- 
joined that  every  king  of  Israel,  soon  after  his  acces- 
sion, should  write  out  with  his  own  hands  a  copy  from 
this  manuscript,  which  was  kept  by  the  priests  and 


40  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

Levites  (Deut.  xvii.  1 8) ;  and  it  seems  to  have  become 
part  of  the  coronation  ceremonies  that  this  original 
documentj  or  at  least  a  copy  of  it,  should  be  placed  in 
the  hands  of  the  king  when  he  was  crowned  (2  Kings 
xi.  12,  and  2  Chron.  xxiii.  1 1).  The  frequent  mention 
of  this  "  Book  of  the  Law "  as  that  which  must  be 
taught  to  men  as  God's  guide  for  their  life  will  occur 
to  every  reader. 

We  find  the  statement  in  the  early  Christian  fathers, 
Tertullian,  Epiphanius,  St.  Augustine,  and  others,  that 
the  other  inspired  books  also  were  placed  in  the  sanc- 
tuary, and  what  is  of  more  consequence,  Josephus,  the 
Jewish  historian,  seems  to  confirm  this  assertion.'^  The 
Bible  also  lends  it  some  support.  We  read  in  Joshua 
xxiv.  26,  that  Joshua  added  on  his  own  writing  to  the 
*'  Book  of  the  Law  ;  "  and  in  I  Sam.  x.  2  5,  that  Samuel 
''  told  the  people  the  manner  of  the  kingdom,  and  wrote 
it  in  the  book,  and  laid  it  up  hcforc  the  Lord."  So 
tliat,  altogether,  there  seems  reason  to  believe  that  the 
Tabernacle,  and  afterwards  the  Temple,  was  the  regular 
depositary  of  the  sacred  manuscripts. 

In  Samuel's  days  the  original  documents  (i.e.,  the 
Law  at  least,  and  perhaps  some  of  the  other  books) 
would  naturally  be  kept  with  the  Ark  in  Shiloh,  tbe 
home  of  the  priests  and  of  sacred  learning. 

1  See  "Antiquities,"  Book  iii.  I.  7,  and  Book  v.  I.  17.  He  speaks 
also  ("Life  of  Josephus,"  §  75)  of  having,  by  the  favour  of  Titus,  saved 
the  "  Holy  Writings  "  at  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  (probably  the 
Temple  manuscripts  of  the  other  books) ;  and  in  the  "  Jewish  Wars  " 
(vii.  V.  5)  he  tells  that  the  Law,  taken  from  the  Temple,  was  borne 
aloft  in  the  triumph  of  Titus  and  placed  in  the  Palace. 


THE  EARLY  AGES. 


41 


But  it  would  seem  as  if  the  growing  degeneracy  of 
the  priesthood  and  their  loss  of  influence  in  the  nation 
necessitated  now  the  calling  forth  of  a  new  order  to 
guard  the  Divine  deposit  and  communicate  its  contents 
to  the  people.  We  find  all  Samuel's  teaching  based 
upon  these  Scripture  records,  and  probably,  that  the 
knowledge  of  them  might  be  preserved  and  dissemi- 
nated, he  founded  his  theological  colleges  or  "  Schools 
of  the  Prophets,"  where  picked  young  scholars  were 
trained  in  the  sacred  learnino^  at  Naioth  and  Gil  oral 
and  Bethel. 

We  find  Elijah  visiting  these  schools  in  later  days 
as  he  passed  to  his  miraculous  assumption,  and  after- 
wards his  successor,  Elisha,  moving  amongst  them 
preparing  and  exhorting  these  young  teachers  of  the 
future.-^ 

The  chief  work  of  the  students  no  doubt  would  be 
the  study  and  expounding  and  copying  of  the  Law, 
though  sacred  poetry  and  music  were  also  an  impor- 
tant part  of  their  course. 

And  not  only  were  they  the  expounders  and  guar- 
dians of  the  older  Scripture,  but  also  as  God  inspired 
them,  the  authors  of  the  new.  They  were  the  national 
poets  and  annalists,  the  composers  of  psalms,  the  com- 
pilers of  records  such  as  the  Books,  of  Nathan  and 
Gad  and  Iddo  tlie  seer,  so  valuable  afterwards  as 
materials  for  the  Old  Testament  history.  Two  of  the 
oldest  of  the  prophetical  books,  Hosea  and  Jonah,  were 
the  work  of  men  trained  in  the  schools  of  Elijah,  and 

^  See  I  Sam.  xix.  19,  20 ;  2  Kings  ii.  3-5,  iv.  38,  vi.  I,  &c. 


42  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

afterwards  no  writing  was  received  as  inspired  unless 
it  could  claim  a  prophet  for  its  author,  though  not 
necessarily  one  trained  in  prophetical  schools. 

It  is  easy  to  see  how  this  new  order  of  trained 
students  would  be  a  further  safeguard  to  the  purity 
of  the  text  originally  committed  to  the  priestly  line, 
and  after  them,  in  the  days  of  the  Captivity,  we  find 
the  regularly  appointed  Guild  of  the  Scribes  and 
the  critical  study  of  the  manuscripts  at  least  in  its 
beginning. 

Before  the  Captivity,  however,  we  have  another 
glimpse  of  the  guardianship  of  the  ''  Books  " — a  reve- 
lation of  gross  neglect  and  of  holy  zeal.  When 
Hezekiah  began  his  reign  he  found  the  Temple  shut 
up,  and  its  worship  and  its  sacred  manuscripts  quite 
disregarded ;  and  so  we  are  told  he  gathered  together 
in  the  East  Street  the  priests  and  the  Levites,  and 
by  his  burning  words  he  aroused  their  enthusiasm  for 
restoring  the  "  service  of  God  and  the  Law  and  the 
commandments." 

How  far  those  men  of  Hezekiah  went  in  examining 
and  restoring  the  Hebrew  manuscripts  it  is  impossible 
to  say.  In  the  passing  mentions  of  them,  we  gather 
that  they  devoted  themselves  in  Jerusalem  to  the  study 
of  the  Law ;  ^  that  they  found  and  copied  out  a  con- 
siderable part  of  the  Proverbs  of  Solomon  ;  ^  that  they 
examined  the  pile  of  copies  of  the  Temple  Psalms 
(how  vast  it  must  have  been  when  the  chief  singers 

^  2  Ohron.  xxx.  22,  xxxi.  4.  -  Pro  v.  xxv.  i. 


THE  EARLY  AGES,  43 

numbered  two  hundred  and  eighty-eiglit !)/  and  from 
tliem  selected  the  genuine  Psalms  of  David  and  Asaph 
the  seer.^  Jewish  tradition  assigns  to  them  also  the 
copying  out  of  the  Books  of  Isaiah,  Ecclesiastes,  and 
Solomon's  Song.  However  this  may  be,  clearly  the 
work  of  the  royal  reformer  and  his  ''  men "  must 
have  had  an  important  bearing  on  the  fortunes  of  the 
Jewish  Bible. 

And  then  comes  a  relapse  almost  to  utter  Paganism. 
The  following  reigns,  with  their  idolatrous  desecration, 
brought  things  to  such  a  pass  that  a  great  sensa- 
tion was  caused  in  the  days  of  Josiah,  when  Hilkiah 
the  priest^  discovered,  in  some  hiding-place,  the  lost 
and  almost  forgotten  ^'  Temple  manuscript "  of  the 
Law,  concealed  probably  to  escape  the  rage  of  the 
idolatrous  Manasseh. 

This  certainly  looks  rather  badly  for  the  guardian- 
ship of  the  old  manuscripts.  And  yet  I  doubt  if  even 
from  this  one  should  argue  to  the  probability  of  their 
having  become  corrupted  either  by  carelessness  or 
design.  The  danger  here  would  be  rather  their  being 
totally  lost.  Indeed,  at  such  times,  the  risk  of  cor- 
ruption through  copyists'  errors  would  probably  be 
smaller  than  ever,  since  there  would  be  very  little 
likelihood  of  any  copying  at  all. 

^  I  Chron.  xxv.  7.  ^2  Chron.  xxix.  30. 

2  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  14,  &c. 


44  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS, 

III. 
Summary  of  this  Evidence. 

It  may  be  well  to  present  this  evidence  in  a  more 
condensed  and  systematic  form,  so  as  to  show  at  a 
glance  what  reason  we  have  for  believing  in  the  sub- 
stantial accuracy  of  the  Hebrew  manuscripts  during 
this  early  period. 

1.  The  deep  reverence  of  the  Jews  for  their  sacred 
writings  and  the  care  with  which  they  were  copied 
in  all  the  known  period  of  the  history  of  the  text 
may  surely  be  assumed  in  this  its  comparatively  un- 
known period  as  well. 

2.  With  regard  to  the  Mosaic  writings  at  least, 
the  Bible  itself  abundantly  confirms  this  assumption. 

3.  The  less  any  manuscript  is  copied,  the  less 
danger,  of  course,  there  is  of  errors  in  copying.  The 
numerous  variations  of  the  New  Testament  documents 
are  a  result  of  the  very  extensive  demand  for  copies. 
There  would  be  but  little  of  this  in  the  early  Old 
Testament  days. 

4.  The  preservation  and  transmission  of  the  text 
was  not  left  to  chance  or  to  untrained  men.  The 
early  manuscripts  were  committed  to  the  priestly 
order  under  peculiarly  solemn  circumstances.  The 
trained  teachers  from  the  schools  of  the  prophets  must 
have  done  much  in  the  guarding  and  copying  as  w^ell 
as  teaching  of  the  Scripture,  and  after  them  in  the 
next  period  arose  the  new  Guild  of  the  Scribes  and 
the  critical  study  of  the  Bible  manuscripts. 


THE  EARLY  AGES.  45 

5.  The  Temple  manuscript  of  the  Law  brought  to 
light  by  Hilkiah,  B.C.  623,  after  its  long  concealment, 
would  probably  tend  to  correct  any  errors  in  existing 
copies  and  preserve  future  transcripts  from  corruption. 

6.  Though  the  other  books  were  not  regarded  with 
as  high  a  veneration  as  the  Pentateuch,  and  therefore 
were  not  so  safe  from  copyists'  mistakes,  yet,  on  the 
other  hand,  they  were  less  often  copied,  not  being 
used  in  worship  or  in  teaching  the  people.  Besides, 
the  prophetic  and  historical  books  were  not  very  long 
in  existence  before  the  great  collecting  and  revising 
of  the  Scriptures,  of  which  we  shall  hear  in  the 
following  chapter.  Indeed,  some  were  not  written 
till  after  the  Captivity,  when  the  jealous  guardianship 
of  the  text  had  already  begun. ^ 

7.  It  is  worth  notice  that  the  inspired  prophets, 
while  sternly  rebuking  the  people  for  their  iniquities, 
and  the  priests  for  their  shortcomings  and  neglect, 
never  let  fall  a  word  charging  them  with  mutilation 
or  corruption  of  the  Word  of  God ;  though,  of  course, 
this  argument  only  holds  good  against  serious  or  wilful 
corruption. 

We  may  add,  too,  that  the  belief  held  by  the  Jews 
of  our  Lord's  time  on  the  subject  should  probably  count 
for  something.  It  is  expressed  in  the  Talmud  '^  that 
Moses  received  the  Book  of  the  Law  from  Sinai,  and 

^  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  Revised  Version,  restoring  the 
definite  article  omitted  by  the  Authorised  in  Dan.  ix.  2,  shows  us  that 
the  prophetic  writings  were  at  that  day  reverently  regarded  as  "the 
Books"  or  "the  Scriptures."  Daniel  read  in  "the  Books  "the  pro- 
phecy of  Jeremiah  about  the  Captivity. 


46  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

delivered  it  to  Joshua ;  Joshua  delivered  it  to  the 
elders,  the  elders  to  the  prophets,  and  the  prophets  to 
the  men  of  the  great  synagogue,  from  whom  it  passed 
to  the  heads  of  the  families  of  the  Scribes."  And 
Josephus,  about  the  same  period,  insists,  "  We  have 
not  an  innumerable  multitude  of  books,  as  the  Greeks, 
but  only  twenty-two,  which  contain  the  record  of  all 
past  times,  and  which  are  justly  believed  to  be  divine. 
.  .  .  During  so  many  ages  as  have  already  passed,  no 
one  has  heen  so  hold  as  to  add  anything  to  them  or  to  take 
anything  from  them,  or  to  make  any  change  in  them  ;  but 
it  becomes  natural  to  all  Jews  from  their  birth  to  esteem 
these  books  to  contain  divine  doctrines,  to  persist  in 
them,  and,  if  occasion  be,  willingly  to  die  for  them."  ^ 

Such  facts  as  these  should  go  far  to  prove  the 
reverence  with  which  the  manuscripts  were  regarded 
and  the  care  exercised  in  their  transmission.  From 
them  we  gather  that  God's  watchful  providence,  by 
the  use  of  ordinary  human  means,  preserved  for  us  at 
least  the  general  purity  of  the  Hebrew  text,  and  the 
fullest  confirmation  of  this  will  meet  us  as  we  go  on. 

But  in  the  case  of  the  New  Testament,  we  know 
that,  with  this  general  purity  of  the  text,  there  existed 
some  minor  slips  and  inaccuracies  of  copyists,  such  as 
have  been  spoken  of  in  a  previous  chapter  as  incidental 
to  all  manuscript-copying,  and  therefore  the  question 
naturally  arises.  Did  such  exist  also  in  the  case  of  the- 
Old  Testament  of  the  ''  Early  Ages  ?  " 

^  Discourse  against  Apion,  §  8. 


THE  EARLY  AGES.  47 

IV. 
A  Search  for  further  Evidence. 

The  reader  will  naturally  ask,  How  on  earth  could 
such  a  question  be  answered  ?  How  can  we  ascertain 
anything  further  about  the  condition  of  the  early  text 
if  every  early  manuscript  has  perished  centuries  and 
centuries  ago  ? 

Well,  reader,  it  is  not  a  very  easy  task,  but  yet  it 
is  not  quite  impossible  either.  Suppose  that  at  the 
close  of  what  we  have  here  called  the  Early  Ages  one 
copy  of  the  existing  Hebrew  Bible  should  have  been 
entirely  separated  off  from  the  rest,  carried  away  to 
a  far- distant  land  where  there  was  no  possibility  of 
contact  ivith  the  Palestine  copies,  and  there  become  the 
parent  of  a  long  line  of  manuscripts.  Suppose  some 
traveller  should  find  for  us  to-day  a  number  of  manu- 
script descendants  of  this  solitary  Bible  which  had 
thus  branched  ojff  2500  years  ago.  Would  not  the 
comparing  of  these  with  our  present  manuscripts  be 
a  valuable  study,  and  help  us  much  in  our  inquiry 
about  the  early  text  ? 

If  we  found  them  absolutely  agreeing  with  ours, 
should  we  not  be  right  in  saying  that  our  Bible  is 
word  for  word  the  same  as  that  of  Palestine  in  the 
Early  Ages,  and  that  all  the  manuscripts  of  these 
Early  Ages  most  probably  agreed  in  every  letter. 

If  we  found  them  agreeing  substantially  with  ours, 
but  differing  a  little   here   and   there   in   words   and 


48  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

turns  of  expression,  perhaps  sometimes  in  adding  or 
omitting  a  few  words  in  a  verse,  should  we  not  con- 
clude that  certainly  our  Bible  is  at  least  substantially 
the  Bible  of  the  Early  Ages,  even  if  it  does  not  corre- 
spond in  every  word  and  letter.  For  all  in  which 
these  two  sets  of  manuscripts  agree  must  infallibly 
have  belonged  to  the  ancient  text  from  which  they 
have  both  sprung.  There  is  no  other  possible  explana- 
tion of  their  agreement,  since,  according  to  our  supposi- 
tion, they  could  have  had  no  contact  with  each  other. 
So  that  the  reader  will  see  we  might  be  quite  able 
thus  to  reproduce  with  certainty  a  large  part  of  the 
ancient  text. 

But  what  of  the  discrepancies  between  the  two  ? 
What  should  we  say  of  them  ?  Surely  this,  that  one 
or  both  of  the  sets  of  manuscripts  had  got  some 
copyists'  errors,  but  at  first  we  could  not  tell  which. 

Suppose  then,  lastly,  that,  while  knowing  of  the 
jealous  care  with  which  our  Scriptures  had  been 
guarded,  we  found  from  the  history  of  this  foreign 
country  that  its  manuscripts  had  been  very  carelessly 
kept,  that  at  one  period  at  least  there  had  been 
designedly  introduced  for  political  purposes  certain 
of  these  differences  which  we  had  noticed.  Should 
we  not  be  inclined  to  say  that  where  their  readings 
differed  from  ours  the  strange  manuscripts  were  pro- 
bably corrupt  all  the  way  through  ;  though,  of  course, 
we  could  not  say  that  in  all  these  differences  our  own 
copies  were  certainly  right  ? 

Thus  it  will  be  evident — and  this  is  very  important 


THE  EARLY  AGES.  49 

to  remember — that  the  bad  character  of  the  strange 
manuscripts  would  not  weaken  their  evidence  as  to 
the  correctness  of  ours  in  places  where  both  agree, 
though  it  would  very  decidedly  weaken  their  evidence 
as  to  the  incorrectness  of  ours  in  places  where  they 
differ. 


Call  our  Next  Witness,  the  Samaritan  Bible. 

Now,  in  our  search  for  evidence  about  the  ancient 
text,  we  come  upon  one  document  which  satisfies  all 
the  above  conditions.  We  discover  that  there  exists  a 
Pentateuch  among  the  Samaritans,  a  book  which  was 
separated  from  the  Jewish  Pentateuch  manuscripts  at 
the  close  of  the  "  Early  Ages,"  though  only  discovered 
by  European  scholars  in  comparatively  recent  times. 

This  document  is  fully  dealt  with  later  on  (Book  ii. 
p.  118),  but  it  is  necessary  to  refer  to  it  slightly  here. 
Its  importance,  of  course,  consists  in  the  fact  that  it  is 
Samaritan  ;  that  its  text  has  existed  separate  from  that 
of  the  Jews  since  about  five  hundred  years  before  Christ 
— at  latest,  since  the  time  when  the  renegade,  Mauasseh, 
in  his  passion  for  his  young  Samaritan  wife,  fled  from 
the  anger  of  Nehemiah  to  be  priest  in  the  schismatic 
temple  of  the  Samaritans  at  Gerizim,^  probably  carry- 
ing with  him  a  copy  of  the  Law.  The  bitter  enmity 
existing  between  the  two  races  is  ample  security  that 

^  Nell.  xiii.  28.     Josephus,  Antiquities,  Book  xi.  chaps,  vii.  and  viii., 
where,  however,  the  story  is  transferred  to  a  later  period. 

D 


50  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

its  text  has  never  since  been  influenced  by  that  of  the 

Jewish  Pentateuch;  there- 
/  fore  the  whole  portion  in 

g  '  which  it  and  our  Jewish 

^  :  manuscripts   of  the  Pen- 

^ :  tateuch    agree,    and    that 

^  .*  means     substantially     al- 

most the  entire   contents, 
7^.  must  certainly  belong   to 

/      \  the  "Early  Ages"  Bible. 

*•  There  is  no  other  way  pos- 

/  •  sible   of   explaining   their 

:*  \  agreement.      So    that,    it 

:  *•.  will  be  seen,  tJiis  Samm^i- 

:  \  tan  Pentateuch  is  a  most 

:  \  important    loitness    to    the 

substantial  ^purity  of  our 
present  text. 

But  then  the  Samari- 
tan, in  certain  particulars, 
is  found  to  differ  from  our 
text.  The  ages  of  the 
patriarchs  do  not  agree ; 
the  name  Ebal,  in  Deut.  xxvii.  4,  appears  as  Gerizim 
— though  this  is  of  little  moment,  it  is  so  evidently 
a  corruption  in  favour  of  the  Samaritan  temple  there ; 
the  narrative  is  fuller  in  many  particulars,  and  there 
are  expansions  and  explanations  of  passages  which 
seem  condensed  and  diflScult  in  the  Jewish  Bible. 
Now,  it  has  been  argued  by  some  that  these  dis- 


THE  EARLY  AGES.  51 

crepancies  go  far  to  sliow  that  at  the  close  of  the 
Early  Ages,  when  the  Samaritan  branched  oflf,  similar 
discrepancies  must  have  existed  between  the  early 
manuscripts ;  that  the  Samaritan  was  copied  from  one 
set  of  manuscripts,  the  Jewish  from  another  and  dif- 
ferent set. 

If  we  were  as  sure  of  accurate  transmission  in  the 
case  of  the  Samaritan  as  we  are  in  that  of  the  Jewish 
Scriptures,  this  would  be  a  good  argument.  When 
the  manuscripts  of  this  Samaritan  Pentateuch  were 
first  imported  into  Europe  in  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury, much  surprise  was  felt  at  its  variations  from  the 
Hebrew,  and  scholars  were  at  first  inclined  to  give  it 
a  high  position.  But,  on  fuller  acquaintance,  it  quite 
lost  its  character,  as  the  reader  will  see  for  himself  later 
on.  Suffice  it  to  say  here,  that  it  now  stands  convicted 
of  having  been  freely  tampered  with,  not  only  for  contro- 
versial purposes,  as  in  the  case  of  Ebal  and  Gerizim,  but 
also  in  many  places  to  remove  what  seemed  difficulties, 
and  to  make  the  narrative  flow  more  freely  and  easily. 

Therefore  we  conclude  that  our  Samaritan  witness 
is  not  of  sufficiently  good  character ;  and  that,  while 
its  substantial  agreement  with  the  Massoretic  manu- 
scripts is  a  strong  confirmation  of  their  correctness,  its 
charge  of  minor  inaccuracies  in  these  Hebrew  manu- 
scripts, or  of  discrepancies  existing  in  the  Early  Ages, 
is,  as  the  Scotch  lawyers  would  say,  "  not  proven." 

At  the  same  time,  some  of  its  variations  are  sup- 
ported by  the  authority  of  the  Septuagint  and  other 
versions  of  the  following  period,   and  it  would  be  a 


52  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

bold  thing  to  say  that  in  every  little  discrepancy 
between  them  the  Jewish  Bible  is  certainly  right 
and  the  Samaritan  certainly  wrong.  There  are  some 
few  instances  at  least  where  we  may  well  doubt  this. 
For  example,  we  give  amongst  the  "Specimens"  in 
Book  iii.  p.  189  a  Samaritan  addition  to  the  text 
of  Gen.  iv.  8  which  is  strongly  supported  by  other 
authority,  and  is  admitted  by  the  recent  revisers  into 
their  margin :  "  Cain  said  to  Abel  his  brother,  Let  us 
(JO  into  the  fielcV  We  have  show^n  in  that  place  that 
the  Samaritan  is  very  probably  right,  and  that  the 
words  may  have  at  some  time  fallen  out  of  the  Hebrew 
text.  In  Gen.  xlvii.  21  it  is  almost  certainly  right 
in  telling  that  Joseph  made  hondmen  of  the  Egyptians 
for  Pharaoh  (see  Eevised  Version,  margin),  instead  of 
merely  "  removing"  them,  as  we  have  it. 

But  we  only  listen  to  it  here  because  other  autho- 
rities strongly  support  it.  We  repeat  again  that  its 
variations  from  the  Hebrew  carry  little  or  no  weight 
with  them.  Like  all  other  such  witnesses,  it  has  to 
suffer  for  its  general  bad  character  even  where  it  may 
be  in  the  right.  No  scholar  would  now  think  of 
using  its  unsupported  testimony  to  call  in  question 
the  accuracy  of  the  Hebrew  text. 

VI. 

Cross-Examine  our  First  Witness. 

There  seems  just  one  other  possible  way  of  learning 
anything  as  to  the   manuscripts  of   the   Early  Ages, 


THE  EARLY  AGES.  53 

and  that  is  by  cross-examining,  as  it  were,  our  first 
witness,  the  existing  Old  Testament  itself.  There  is 
a  certain  class  of  evidence  found  within  its  covers 
which  is  sometimes  brought  forward  as  a  proof  that 
in  the  Early  Ages,  before  the  separate  books  were 
collected  into  one  Jewish  "  Bible,"  and  the  Canon  of 
the  Old  Testament  closed,  the  manuscripts  must  have 
suffered  from  careless  transcription. 

It  is  that  of  ' '  repeated  passages."  What  seem  to 
be  copies  of  the  same  writings  are  found  in  two  or 
more  different  places,  and  these  passages,  when  closely 
compared,  are  found  to  exhibit  variations  of  more  or 
less  importance. 

Compare,  for  example  : — 

2  Sam.  xxii.  with  Ps.  xviii. 

Ps.  xiv.  ,,    Ps.  liii. 

I  Chr.  xvi.  8-22 

1  Chr.  xvi.  23-33 

2  Kings  xix.,  xx. 
2  Kings  XXV. 
Isa.  XV.,  xvi. 


Ps.  cv.  1-15. 

Ps.  xcvi. 

Isa.  xxxvii.,  xxxviii. 

Jer.  lii. 

Jer.  xlviii. 


There  are  nearly  a  hundred  such  instances  of 
parallelism  in  the  Old  Testament,  easily  discovered  by 
means  of  a  good  Pieference  Bible ;  and  to  understand 
aright  the  value  cf  their  evidence,  the  reader  should 
examine  a  few  of  them  for  himself  before  going  on. 
However,  as  one  cannot  trust  all  readers  to  take  this 
trouble,  perhaps  we  had  better  print  one  or  two  illus- 


54 


THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 


trations.     Let  us  take  at 
in  the  above  list : — 
2  Sam.  xxn. 


The  Lord  is  my  rock,  and  my 
fortress,  and  deliverer ; 

The  God  of  my  rock  ;  in  Him  will 
I  trust : 

My  shield,  and  the  horn  of  my 
salvation,  my  high  tower,  and  my 
refuge,  my  Saviour  ;  Thou  savest  me 
from  violence. 

I  will  call  upon  the  Lord,  who  is 
worthy  to  be  praised  : 

So  shall  I  be  saved  from  mine 
enemies. 

When  the  waves  of  death  com- 
passed me, 

The  floods  of  ungodliness  made 
me  afi-aid  ; 

The  cords  of  Sheol  were  round 
about  me  ; 

The  snares  of  death  came  upon 
me. 

In  my  distress  I  called  upon  the 
Lord, 

Yea,  I  called  unto  my  God. 

And  He  rode  upon  a  cherub  and 
did  fly ; 

Yea,  He  was  seen  upon  the  wings 
of  the  wind. 

And  He  made  darkness  pavilions 
round  about  Him. 

Psalm  xiv. 

The  fool  hath  said  in  his  heart, 
There  is  no  God. 

They  are  corrupt ;  they  have  done 
abominable  works  ; 

There  is  none  that  doeth  good. 

The  Lord  looked  down  from 
heaven  upon  the  children  of  men, 

To  see  if  there  were  any  that  did 
understand, 

That  did  seek  after  God. 


random  tlie  first  two  pairs 


Psalm  xviii, 

I  love  Thee,  O  Lord,  my 
strength. 

The  Lord  is  my  rock,  and  my 
fortress,  and  delivei-er  ; 

My  God,  my  strong  rock  ;  in  Him 
will  I  trust : 

My  shield,  and  the  horn  of  my 
salvation,  my  high  tower. 


I  will  call  upon  the  Lord,  who  is 
worthy  to  be  jDraised  : 

So  shall  I  be  saved  from  mine 
enemies. 

The  cords  of  death  compassed 
me, 

And  the  floods  of  ungodliness 
made  me  afraid. 

The  cords  of  Sheol  were  round 
about  me  ; 

The  pains  of  death  came  upon 
me. 

In  my  distress  I  called  upon  the 
Lord, 

And  cried  unto  my  God. 

And  He  rode  upon  a  cherub  and 
did  fly ; 

Yea,  He  flew  swiftly  upon  the 
wings  of  the  wind. 

He  made  darkness  His  hiding- 
rlace.  His  pavilion  round  about 
Him. 

Psalm  liii. 

The  fool  hath  said  in  his  heart, 
There  is  no  God. 

Corrupt  are  they,  and  have  done 
abominable  iniquity. 

There  is  none  that  doeth  good. 

God  looked  down  from  heaven 
upon  the  children  of  men, 

To  see  if  there  were  any  that  did 
understand. 

That  did  seek  after  God. 


Have  all  the  workers  of  iniquity 
no  knowledge  ? 

Who  eat  up  my  people  as  they 
cat  bread. 

And  call  not  upon  the  Lord. 


Have  the  workers  of  iniquity  no 
knowledge  ? 

Who  eat  up  my  people  as  they 
eat  bread, 

And  call  not  upon  God. 


THE  EARLY  AGES.  55 

In  the  first  of  tliese  cases  the  existence  of  two 
separate  editions  of  the  same  poem  is  easily  under- 
stood. A  couple  of  thousand  years  ago  the  compilers 
of  the  Book  of  Psalms,  the  Jewish  Church  Hymnal, 
extracted  the  poem  for  their  collection  out  of  2 
Samuel,  or  perhaps  the  author  of  2  Samuel  copied 
it  from  the  hymn-book  to  insert  in  his  story.  In 
after  -  days  this  history  and  this  hymn-book  were 
bound  between  the  same  covers,  and  thus  we  find  two 
separate  copies  of  the  poem,  and  what  concerns  us 
most,  we  find  that  these  two  copies  do  not  exactly 
correspond. 

Now,  it  has  been  argued  that  the  difierences  between 
them  point  to  a  corruption  of  either  or  both  the 
copies,  and  as  the  Bible  copyists  of  later  days  had 
grown  so  extremely  scrupulous  about  the  accuracy  of 
the  text,  therefore  the  corruption  probably  belongs 
to  the  Early  Ages. 

But  do  the  discrepancies  point  to  corruption  at  all  ? 
Not  necessarily,  I  think.  In  all  our  present  Church 
Hymnals  there  are  poems  selected  out  of  the  works  of 
certain  authors,  and  designedly  shortened  or  modified 
in  some  expression  to  make  them  suitable  for  singing 
in  church.  Surely  this  may  easily  have  happened 
in  the  instances  before  us  without  any  corruption  or 
carelessness  at  all. 

Again,  in  the  other  pair  of  parallels,  Ps.  xiv.  and 
liii.,  we  have  an  earlier  and  later  edition  of  the  same 
hymn.  What  was  to  prevent  the  author  from  improving 
his  poem  or  slightly  altering  an  expression  to  make 


56  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

it  more  suitable  for  the  purpose  for  which  it  was 
afterwards  used  ?  Such  is  a  very  common  case.  Only 
recently  the  magazines  have  been  dealing  with  some 
manuscript  copies  of  Lord  Tennyson's  poems  which 
tell  a  curious  story  as  to  the  many  little  variations 
which  the  author  had  made  between  the  first  writing 
of  them  and  their  appearance  in  print.  Why  should 
not  David  or  Solomon,  or  any  other  inspired  writer, 
take  as  much  trouble  as  Lord  Tennyson  about  a  manu- 
script poem,  especially  with  the  solemn  feeling  that  he 
was  writing  for  the  worship  of  the  Temple  of  God. 

And  similarly  may  be  explained,  perhaps,  many  of 
the  discrepancies  in  the  other  passages  referred  to. 
The  reader  will  see  that  they  are  cases  where  the 
author  or  compiler  of  a  book  transfers  bodily  into 
his  text  a  previous  composition,  either  his  own  or 
another's,  as  it  suits  his  purpose.  Now,  in  such  a  case 
he  is  not  necessarily  bound  to  adhere  strictly  to  the 
letter  of  the  borrowed  passage.  The  author  of  the 
Book  of  Kings,  for  example,  transfers  a  long  passage 
out  of  Isaiah's  writings,  and  in  so  doing  varies  it  to 
suit  his  purpose,  making  the  history  more  minute  and 
circumstantial.  There  is  no  reason  why  he  should 
not,  just  as  in  the  Psalter  there  is  no  reason  why 
the  compiler  of  a  hymn-book  or  the  original  writer 
of  a  hymn  should  not  insert  or  omit  verses  or  slightly 
alter  an  expression  unsuitable  to  the  occasion  for 
which  the  hymn  was  afterwards  used.  This  should 
cause  no  difficulty  to  us.  There  is  much  in  the  Bible 
of    compiling  and  editing    of    older   writings,   which 


THE  EARLY  AGES.  57 

surely  was  as  mucli  under  God's  guidance  as  were 
the  original  writings  themselves.  The  inspired  writers 
had  as  much  freedom  as  any  other  writers  in  express- 
ing the  same  thing  differently  at  different  times  or  in 
adapting  the  words  of  earlier  documents  to  suit  their 
present  purposes. 

Therefore  we  are  not  to  assume  that  any  two  of 
these  similar  passages  must  necessarily  have  agreed 
originally  word  for  word.  In  some  cases  the  changes 
seem  clearly  designed.  At  the  same  time,  there  can 
be  little  doubt  that  many  of  the  smaller  verbal  varia- 
tions detected  by  this  comparison  of  passages  are  the 
result  of  inaccuracy  on  the  part  of  some  transcriber. 

Let  us  take  one  example  for  illustration  from  each 
of  our  specimens  : — 

(i.)  2  Sam.  xxii.  11,  "He  was  seen  upon  the 
wdngs  of  the  wind "  is  rendered  in  the  parallel,  Ps. 
xviii.  10,  "He  did  fly  upon  the  wings  of  the  wind." 
It  might  seem  at  first  sight  probable  that  this  was  an 
intentional  change  originally  made.  But  when  it  is 
pointed  out  that  the  Hebrew  words  are  in  the  one 
case  hi")^")  ("He  was  seen"),  and  in  the  other  Nl''') 
("He  did  fly"),  no  unbiassed  reader  can  avoid  sus- 
pecting a  copyist's  slip  between  that  old  pair  of 
eternal  mischief-makers  "1  and  1  (r  and  d)} 

^  These  letters  closely  resembled  each  other  both  in  the  earlier  and 
later  alphabets,  so  this  error  may  belong  to  later  times.  It  is  not  easy 
to  give  an  example  of  copyist's  error  from  similar  letters  that  we  can 
with  certainty  assign  to  the  Early  Ages.  Probably  we  shall  find  one 
by  comparing  2  Chron.  xxii.  I,  2,  giving  forty-two  years  as  the  age  of 
Ahaziah  at  his  accession,  with  the  parallel  passage  2  Kings  viii.  26, 


58  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

(2.)  Ps.  xiv.  2,  "  The  Lord  (Rehrew,  Jehovah) 
looked  down  from  heaven  upon  the  children  of 
men,"  &c.,  is  rendered  in  the  parallel,  Ps.  liii.  2,  "  God 
looked  down  from  heaven,"  &c. 

This  is  a  different  class  of  variation  altogether.  It 
points  to  a  time  early  in  Jewish  history,  when  the 
' '  unspeakable  name  "  Jehovah  began  to  be  regarded 
with  such  extreme  reverence  that  there  was  the  greatest 
reluctance  to  pronounce  it,  even  in  reading  the  Bible. 
So  strong  did  this  feeling  become  at  one  period,  that  it 
was  publicly  declared  that,  "  Whosoever  uttereth  the 
Sacred  Name  shall  have  no  part  in  the  world  to  come." 
Therefore  various  expedients  were  devised.  When 
they  met  the  word  they  read  instead  of  it  "  The  Name," 
or  "  God,"  or  "  Adonai."  We  shall  hear  more  of  this 
afterwards  in  the  notes  of  the  Massoretes. 

Here  is  evidently  a  case  where,  in  making  copies  of 
the  Psalm  for  the  Temple-singers,  the  word  God  was 
not  merely  read,  but  actually  substituted  in  the  manu- 
script for  Jehovah  ;  and  it  is  done,  the  reader  will 
see,  everywhere  that  it  occurs  throughout  this  Psalm. 
Clearly  Ps.  xiv.  is  the  original  poem,  and  the  other  is 
a  later  copy  of  it.      It  is  well  for  the  reader,  however, 

which  makes  him  only  twenty-two.  Similarity  of  letters  might  easily 
cause  this  discrepancy,  as  the  Jews,  like  ourselves,  used  letters  to  express 
numbers,  and  the  ancient  letters  for  twenty  and  forty  might  easily  be 
mistaken  one  for  the  other.  This  may  perhaps  be  the  source  of  error 
also  in  other  very  improbable  numbers,  such  as  the  50,070  men  of  the 
little  village  of  Bethshemesh  (i  Sam.  vi.  19),  slain  for  irreverence 
toward  the  Ark  of  God,  which,  if  it  be  an  error,  must  belong  to  these 
Early  Ages,  since  it  is  copied  in  the  Septuagint  version  of  the  follow- 
ing period. 


THE  EARLY  AGES.  59 

to  remember  that  this  rare  case  of  a  copyist  actually 
altering  a  word  intentionally  proceeds,  not  from  care- 
lessness or  controversial  bias,  but  from  the  uttermost 
extreme  of  reverence,  and  therefore  gives  no  grounds 
for  suspicion  of  inaccurate  copying  in  general.  Even 
this  could  only  have  occurred  in  early  times.  A  later 
copyist  would  cut  off  his  right  hand  rather  than  make 
even  such  a  trifling  alteration. 


VII. 

The  Verdict. 

Space  will  not  permit  of  our  entering  more  fully  here 
into  this  subject,  or  pointing  out  the  passages  in  which 
a  copyist's  error  may  probably  exist. -^  The  revisers' 
margin  may  be  investigated  for  some  "  various  read- 
ings "  which  they  mention  with  approval,  especially  in 
the  historical  books  from  Samuel  to  Chronicles.  With 
others  we  shall  have  to  deal  in  the  latter  part  of  this 
book.  We  are  at  present  inquiring  only  as  to  the  con- 
dition of  the  text  in  its  earliest  period.  The  evidence, 
it  will  be  seen,  is  quite  insufficient  for  any  positive 
decision  on  the  matter ;  but  we  are  warranted  at  least 
in  saying  that  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  all  the 
copies  of  that  period  did  not  correspond  minutely  in 
every  little  word  and  letter.      Besides  the  considera- 

^  For  example,  that  Saul  was  one  year  old  when  he  began  to  reign 
(see  p.  193)  ;  the  mistake  about  the  name  Vashni  among  the  sons  of 
Samuel  (i  Chron.  vi.  28  ;  see  specimen,  p.  202)  ;  the  defect  in  the 
verse,  "  They  pierced  my  hands  and  my  feet "  (Ps.  xxii.  16),  where  the 
Hebrew  manuscripts  make  no  sense  at  all  (see  specimen,  p.  204). 


6o  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

tions  already  presented  there  is  this  also  to  be  taken 
into  account.  Scholars  are  all  agreed  that  some 
superficial  flaws  exist  in  the  Hebrew  Bible  of  to-day. 
If  so,  this  early  period  must  have  had  at  least  its  full 
share  in  producing  them,  partly  because  some  of  them 
are  repeated  by  the  Septuagint  version  in  the  follow- 
ing period,  and  therefore  must  belong  to  an  earlier 
date,  partly  because  the  continually  increasing  care 
in  the  guardianship  of  the  text  made  their  occurrence 
less  probable  after  the  days  of  Ezra. 


CHAPTER    VI. 

THE    STORY   OF    THE    MANUSCRIPTS. 

THE  MEN  OF  THE  GREAT  SYNAGOGUE. 

I. 

The  Exiles'  Return. 

The  second  period  in  the  "  Story  of  the  Manu- 
scripts "  extends  frcm  the  time  of  Ezra  to  that  of  our 
Lord,  or  more  accurately  perhaps  to  the  destruction  of 
Jerusalem,  a.d.  70. 

It  is  introduced  by  the  touching  scene  in  the 
eighth  chapter  of  Nehemiah,  the  thousands  of  re- 
turned exiles  that  September  morning  bowing  in  wor- 
ship in  the  "broad  place  that  was  before  the  Water. 
Gate "  in  Jerusalem,  and  Ezra  the  scribe,  from  the 
pulpit  of  wood,  reading  to  them  out  of  his  Hebrew 
manuscript  the  almost  forgotten  words  of  Moses. 
But  the  glory  is  departed  of  the  ancient  days;  the 
holy  tongue  sounds  strangely  in  ears  accustomed  so 
long  to  the  speech  of  their  Chaldean  masters  —  did 
this  feeling  help  to  cause  that  sobbing  through  the 
crowd  ? — for  we  are  told  that  the  Scribes  had  to  give 
the  sense  with  an  interpretation  so  that  the  people 


62  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS, 

might  understand  the  reading.  This  is  an  important 
fact  in  the  history  of  the  text.  From  this  time  forth 
the  classic  Hebrew  of  the  Bible  became  almost  exclu- 
sively the  property  of  the  educated.  The  Jews  for- 
got their  ancient  language  for  the  kindred  Aramaic 
of  business  life,  just  as  the  Scotch  Highlanders  and 
the  Irish  to-day  are  forgetting  their  poetical  mother- 
tongue  for  the  more  useful  English. 

A  few  weeks  afterwards  there  is  another  solemn 
gathering,  "  when  the  children  of  Israel  being  as- 
sembled with  fasting  and  sackcloth  and  earth  upon 
them,  separated  themselves  from  all  strangers,  and 
stood  and  confessed  their  sins  and  the  iniquity  of 
their  fathers."  Who  can  read  unmoved  their  pathetic 
pleading?  *'Thou  art  a  gracious  and  a  merciful 
God.  Now  therefore,  our  God,  the  great,  the  mighty 
and  terrible  God,  let  not  all  the  trouble  seem  little 
before  Thee  that  hath  come  upon  us  since  the  time 
of  the  kings  of  Assyria  to  this  day.  Howbeit  Thou 
art  just  in  all  that  is  brought  upon  us,  for  Thou  hast 
done  right,  but  we  have  done  wickedly."^  And  at 
last,  at  the  close  of  their  pleading,  comes  that  simple, 
beautiful  ceremony  so  expressive  of  their  genuine 
repentance  and  resolve — what  an  inspiration  for  a 
powerful  picture ! — the  rough  roll  of  skin  produced 
before  the  people  inscribed  with  a  solemn  covenant  of 
service  to  Jehovah,  the  leaders  standing  forth  in  their 
order;    first  the  priests,  then  the   Levites,  then   the 

A  Neh.  ix.  32 ;  x.  27. 


THE  MEN  OF  THE  GREAT  SYNAGOGUE.        63 

chieftains  of  the  tribes,  one  by  one  signing  it  in 
Israel's  name — 

JVehemiahj  the  TirsJiatha,  son  of  HachaliaJi ;  ZecU- 
hiah  ;  Seraiali ;  Azariah  ;  Jcremiali ;  PasJiur  ; 

and  so  on  through  the  long  roll.  It  is  a  scene  worth 
dwelling  upon.  Fourscore  and  four  men  solemnly 
binding  upon  themselves  and  the  people  for  whom 
they  signed  ''to  do  justly  and  love  mercy,  and 
walk  humbly  with  their  God " — the  Church  of  the 
Kestoration  unconsciously  fitting  itself  for  the  hero- 
days  of  the  Maccabees.  The  true  glory  of  Israel  was 
surely  not  past  while  such  things  were  still  possible 
in  the  land. 

II. 

The  Legend  of  the  Great  Synagogue. 

That  list  of  names,  says  Jewish  tradition,  is  the 
first  muster-roll  of  the  "  men  of  the  Great  Synagogue," 
the  men  chosen  as  God's  instruments  for  selecting 
and  revising  and  preserving  for  the  world  the  books 
of  the  Hebrew  Bible.  The  tradition  at  least  ex- 
presses a  perception  of  the  fitness  of  such  men  for 
this  lofty  work.  For  it  was  as  true  then  as  it  was  in 
the  days  of  the  Wycliffe  Bible  in  England,  that  he 
who  meddleth  in  such  studies  ' '  hath  nede  to  live  a 
clene  life  and  be  full  devout  in  preiers  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  author  of  wisdom  and  cunnynge  dresse  him 
for  his  work  and  sufier  him  not  to  err." 


64  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

According  to  the  Jews,  Ezra  was  president  of  the 
Great  Synagogue,  and  at  different  periods  Daniel, 
Haggai,  Zechariali,  Malachi,  Zerubbabel,  Nehemiali, 
&c.,  were  members.  It  ceased,  they  say,  at  the  death 
of  Simon  the  Just,  the  last  of  its  members,  about  the 
year  300  B.C. 

Eound  this  assembly  tradition  clusters  everything 
important  connected  with  the  Jewish  Bible.  With 
them  ended  the  voices  of  the  prophets.  By  them  the 
separate  books  were  revised  and  edited  and  formed 
into  a  Bible,  so  that  nothing  written  after  them  would 
be  received  as  inspired.  By  their  wisdom  the  pronun- 
ciation was  authoritatively  fixed,  and  careful  rules  for 
writing  and  interpretations  were  made  to  safeguard 
the  accuracy  of  the  inspired  Word.  The  authorship 
of  Chronicles,  Ezra,  Nehemiah,  and  the  minor  pro- 
phets ;  the  change  from  the  ancient  Hebrew  to  the 
present  square  writing  ;  the  beginning  of  the  celebrated 
notes  of  the  Massorah ;  the  foundation  of  colleges  for 
Biblical  study,  and  many  things  besides,  with  much 
or  little  foundation,  the  Jews  delight  to  associate  with 
the  name  of  Ezra  and  his  famous  Great  Synagogue. 

Here  is  an  extract  from  Kabbi  Jacob  ben  Cha- 
jim's  well-known  introduction  to  the  Rabbinical  Bible  : 
"  And  the  men  of  the  Great  Synagogue,  in  whom  was 
heavenly  light  and  powerful  like  the  purest  gold,  on 
whose  hearts  every  study  of  the  Law  was  engraved, 
have  set  up  marks,  and  built  walls  and  bars  and  gates 
to  preserve  the  citadel  in  its  splendour  and  brightness. 
They  came  to   the  transparent  cloud   of  its  burning 


THE  MEN  OF  THE  GREAT  SYNAGOGUE.        65 

doctrine ;  they  sanctified  themselves  to  take  the  fire 
from  off  the  altar,  so  that  no  other  hand  might  touch 
and  desecrate  it.  And  the  Spirit  alighted  upon  them 
as  if  by  prophecy  ;  they  wrote  down  their  labours  in 
books,  to  which  nothing  is  to  be  added ;  and  when 
they  had  finished  their  work,  the  supernatural  vision 
and  its  sources  were  sealed,  the  glory  and  splendour 
departed,  and  the  angel  of  the  Lord  appeared  no 
more.  For  no  one  arose  after  them  who  could  do  as 
they  did.  And  now  we  are  here  this  day  gathering 
the  gleanings  ;  we  capture  the  faint  ones  of  their  rear- 
guard ;  we  run  in  their  path  day  and  night,  and  toil, 
but  can  never  come  up  to  them." 


III. 
Is  the  Legend  True? 

How  much  of  this  old  Jewish  tradition  is  trust- 
worthy it  is  very  difficult  to  say.  The  Jews  assert 
that  the  story  of  the  Great  Synagogue  is  as  certain  as 
almost  any  fact  in  their  history ;  while,  on  the  other 
hand,  some  modern  critics  regard  it  as  little  better 
than  a  myth  founded  on  the  list  of  names  in  the  Book 
of  Nehemiah. 

There  is  not  sufficient  evidence  for  any  positive 
opinion  as  to  the  details  of  the  subject.  The  main 
facts,  however,  are  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt.  We 
know  that  there  was  gathered  round  Ezra  a  circle  of 
"men  of  understanding"  (Ezra  viii.  16),  with  whom 

£ 


66  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

he  took  counsel,  and  who  helped  him  in  his  work, 
some  of  whose  names,  too,  are  identical  with  those  of 
the  "  signers  of  the  Koll." 

We  know  also  that,  from  that  morning  at  the 
Water  Gate,  when  the  "  Great  Scribe"  stood  with  his 
manuscript  on  the  pulpit  of  wood,  there  never  ceased 
in  Israel  a  regularly  appointed  Guild  of  Scribes. 
They  were  the  men  whose  business  it  was  to  copy 
and  preserve  and  expound  to  the  people  the  ancient 
oracles  of  God.  They  were  the  men  also,  a  few  cen- 
turies later,  who  pursued  to  the  death  the  Son  of  God 
Himself. 

Somewhere  in  this  period,  too,  must  be  placed  the 
collecting  of  the  scattered  Holy  Books  into  a  complete 
Jewish  Bible,  when  the  Canon  of  the  Old  Testament 
was  closed ;  so  that  no  books  written  afterwards 
would  be  received  as  inspired.  Whether  this  was  done 
gradually  or  at  some  one  solemn  council,  whether  it 
was  done  by  the  traditional  "Great  Synagogue"  or 
no,  are  details  that  may  very  well  be  left  open  to 
question.  1 

That  the  change  to  the  later  square  writing  took 
place  then  is  also  positively  eertain.  I  do  not  see 
why  the  Jews  should  not  be  right  that  it   at   least 

^  There  is  a  tradition  probable  enough,  2  Maccabees  ii.  13,  of  the 
library  or  collection  that  Nehemiah  made,  which,  with  other  books, 
contained  the  books  about  the  Kings  and  Prophets,  and  the  "  Writings 
of  David."  Thus  may  have  begun  the  collection  of  the  second  part  of 
the  Bible.  The  Pentateuch,  of  course,  is  not  included  in  the  list.  It 
was  from  its  beginning  par  excellence  "  The  Bible,"  reverenced  by  the 
Jews  and  Samaritans  alike.  The  latter  reject  all  the  rest  of  the 
Scriptures. 


THE  MEN  OF  THE  GREAT  SYNAGOGUE.        67 

began  in  the  lifetime  of  Ezra.  What  more  probable 
than  that  the  copy  of  the  Law  which  he  brought  back 
from  Babylon  should  have  been  written  in  the  new 
square  characters  which  during  the  days  of  their  exile 
had  become  so  much  more  familiar  to  him  and  to 
his  fellows  than  the  ancient  handwriting  of  their  fore- 
fathers. At  any  rate  there  is  positive  evidence  that 
some  of  the  manuscripts  were  thus  written  not  very 
long  after  Ezra's  time.  Eor  on  examining  the  Sep- 
tuagint  (Greek  Bible),  translated  during  this  period, 
we  discover  several  mistakes  arising  from  this  con- 
fusion between  similar  letters,  referred  to  already ;  and 
we  find  in  many  cases  that  the  letters  thus  confused, 
while  similar  in  the  new  square  alphabet,  had  no  like- 
ness at  all  in  the  ancient  writing,  and  so  could  not 
in  it  have  been  mistaken  the  one  for  the  other. 

That  Ezra  and  the  Great  Synagogue  so  examined 
and  corrected  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament  as  to 
leave  them  absolutely  perfect  has  sometimes  been 
asserted  in  a  past  generation  even  by  eminent  Hebrew 
scholars,  but  there  is  no  good  reason  to  believe  any- 
thing of  the  kind.  They  probably  did  all  that  ear- 
nest scholarly  men  could  do  to  correct  copyists'  errors. 
They  had  every  facility  for  so  doing;  in  many 
cases  very  likely  the  original  autograph  manuscripts 
of  the  inspired  writers  were  before  them.  But  this 
is  the  utmost  that  can  be  said.  That  the  whole 
Old  Testament  together  was  at  any  period  absolutely 
word  for  word  as  it  left  the  hands  of  the  writers  no 
one  who  understands  its  history  will  venture  to  say. 


68  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

IV. 
Ancient  Criticism — Esau's  Teeth. 

But  traces  are  not  wanting  in  their  day  of  the  begin- 
ning of  a  critical  study  of  the  text.  They  introduced 
into  their  manuscripts  the  two  "  vowel  letters,"  as 
they  are  called,  w  and  y  (l  and  >),  to  represent  the  two 
principal  sounds,  and  thus  to  give  more  definiteness  to 
the  consoD  ant-writing.  1 

They  attempted,  too,  a  crude  sort  of  Biblical  criti- 
cism, such  as  the  marking  in  a  certain  way  words 
about  which  there  was  something  peculiar.  The  reader, 
perhaps,  will  wonder  how  this  can  be  known  when  no 
one  even  of  our  most  ancient  writers  has  ever  seen 
one  of  these  vanished  copies.  He  will  find,  however, 
in  the  following  period  of  the  history,  that  the  copyists 
there  make  notes  about  certain  dots  and  marks  which 
had  been  transferred  into  their  manuscripts  from  earlier 
times,  and  which  were  so  ancient  that  their  meaning 
had  even  then  become  completely  lost. 

Some  of  their  guesses  at  the  meaning  are  rather 
amusing.  For  instance,  in  the  account  of  Esau's 
meeting  with  Jacob,  we  are  told  (Gen.  xxxiii.  4)  that 
he  fell  on  his  neck  and  kissed  him,  and  the  words 
"  and  kissed  him  "  are  marked  thus  by  these  mysterious 
dots,  which  remain  to  this  day  in  our  Hebrew  Bibles. 

i  There  is  no  need  of  perplexing  the  reader  with  minute  explana- 
tions about  these  vowel  letters.  They  must  not  be  confused  with  the 
vowel  points  mentioned  already  (p.  7,  &c.),  which  did  not  appear  for 
one  thousand  years  afterwards.  But  they  were  the  first  step  in  that 
direction  towards  defining  and  fixing  the  true  pronunciation. 


THE  MEN  OF  THE  GREAT  SYNAGOGUE.        69 

Some  of  the  old  commentators  were  greatly  exercised  in 
mind  about  the  explanation  of  this.  One  thought  they 
denoted  that  the  kiss  was  sincere  ;  another  that  it  was 
not  sincere ;  while  a  third  wise  teacher  sagely  informed 
his  readers  that  these  dots  were  intended  to  represent 
the  marks  of  Esau's  teeth,  and  to  denote  that  Esau,  in 
pretending  to  kiss  Jacob,  really  bit  him  !  I  have  some- 
where met  with  an  extraordinary  inquiry  into  Jacob's 
kissing  Rachel,  and  why  he  lifted  up  his  voice  and  wept, 
but  I  do  not  think  it  much  exceeds  in  absurdity  this 
wise  sage's  disquisition  about  Esau's  kissing  Jacob. 

Stupid  as  it  is,  however,  it  is  useful  in  pointing  out 
the  antiquity  of  these  critical  remarks.  Probably  they 
belonged  to  somewhere  in  this  second  period,  and  were 
intended  to  denote  some  peculiarity  about  the  words, 
perhaps  the  Scribe's  doubt  as  to  their  correctness. 
Professor  Abbott  tells  us,  in  the  Church  Quarterly  for 
April  1889,  that  one  ancient  Jewish  authority  attributes 
the  marks  to  Ezra  himself  (not  that  that  counts  for 
anything),  and  that  he  gives  the  curious  reason  for  them 
that  Ezra,  not  being  quite  sure  whether  the  words  were 
correct  or  not,  dotted  them,  so  as  to  save  himself  from 
blame  in  either  case — a  sort  of  schoolboy  trick,  the 
imputation  of  which  is  scarcely  very  flattering  to  the 
"  Great  Scribe  of  the  Law."  ''  When  Ezra,"  says  he, 
"  was  asked  why  he  dotted  a  certain  word,  he  replied, 
*  When  Elijah  comes,  if  he  asks  why  I  wrote  down  that 
word  I  will  answer,  "  I  have  already  dotted  it "  (i.c.^  as 
incorrect) ;  but  if  he  asks  me  why  I  dotted  that  word, 
since  it  was  correct,  then  I  will  rub  out  the  dots ! ' " 


70  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 


A  Famous  Witness  to  the  Great  Synagogue  Bible. 

Now  comes  a  very  interesting  question — Are  the 
Hebrew  manuscripts  which  have  come  down  to  us 
absolutely  word  for  word  the  same  as  those  which 
were  thus  studied  and  criticised  by  the  Scribes  in 
the  ancient  Great  Synagogue  days?     In  the  absence 

of  all  the  ancient  manu- 
scripts, is  there  any  pos- 
r^  :  sibility  of  answering  this 

-^  :  question  ? 

^  :  Well,  there  is  a  witness 

/*  :  to  be  produced  here  too, 

f    ;'       ;  as  in  the   earlier   period. 

o  •  *• 

§  .  :  •  The  stream  has,  as  it  were, 

^1^  :  \  been  tapped  again  lower 

^     ;*  ;  down  and  a  sample  taken 

*.  which  if  it  had  been  kept 

:      :  \  pure  would  have  been  of 

;        \  •  incalculable   value   to-day 

in  determining  for  us  the 

condition   of   the   ancient 

Bible. 

I   refer  to  the   "  Sep- 
tuagint,"  the   Greek  ver- 
sion of  the  Old  Testament, 
which   was   begun    aSbout 
280  years  before    Christ  for  the  use   of  the  Greek 


THE  MEN  OF  THE  GREAT  SYNAGOGUE.        71 

speaking  "Jews  o£  the  Dispersion,"-^  and  was  the 
Bible  chiefly  used  by  our  Lord  and  His  apostles.  It 
must,  of  course,  have  been  translated  from  Hebrew 
manuscripts  of  this  period. 

The  strange  story  of  this  Septuagint  is  fully  given 
in  Book  ii. ;  therefore  we  shall  refer  to  it  here  merely 
in  so  far  as  is  necessary  for  our  purpose  of  using  it 
as  a  witness. 

The  first  thing  that  is  revealed  to  us  by  a  close 
examination  is  that  it  agrees  substantialhj  right  through 
with  our  present  Hebrew  Bible,  though  differing  from 
it  sometimes  in  minor  details.  Therefore,  as  we  saw 
in  the  case  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  at  an  earlier 
date,  this  Septuagint  is  a  most  valuable  witness  to  the 
fact  that  our  Hebrew  Bible  of  to-day  is  substantially 
the  same  book  that  was  in  use  three  hundred  years 
before  Christ. 

Now,  this  is  a  most  important  piece  of  evidence  in 
these  sceptical  days,  and  with  all  the  defects  of  the 
Samaritan  and  Septuagint,  one  must  deeply  regret  the 
foolish  zeal  of  certain  well-meaning  writers  who,  be- 
cause these  documents  do  not  corroborate  our  Hebrew 
Bible  in  every  word,  try  all  they  can  to  discredit 
them  as  mere  corruptions  of  the  Word  of  God  which 
scarce  deserve  to  be  mentioned  at  all  in  the  investiga- 
tion of  the  ancient  text.  In  the  first  place,  this  is 
not  true,  and  if  it  were  true  it  would  be  a  very 
bad  thing  for  the  Bible.  For  suppose  it  should  be 
objected  that  the  Old  Testament  was  a  forgery  of  the 

^  Jas.  i.  I ;  I  Pet.  i,  I  (Revised  Version). 


72  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

Scribes  shortly  before  the  time  of  Christ,  or  that  the 
Jews  had  seriously  tampered  with  the  original  deposit 
on  account  of  the  support  it  gave  to  the  hated  Chris- 
tianity, what  a  source  of  doubt  and  disturbance  these 
charges  might  become  in  the  absence  of  all  ancient 
Hebrew  manuscripts  if  God  had  not  preserved  for  us 
such  providential  proofs  of  the  existence  of  the  Bible 
in  those  far-back  ages,  and  of  its  all  but  complete 
agreement  with  the  Bible  of  to-day ! 

Let  one,  therefore,  again  call  speeial  attention  to  the 
fact  that  the  Pentateuch  of  the  Samaritans  proves  the 
substantial  agreement  of  our  Pentateuch  with  that  fire 
hundred  years  before  Christ,  and  that  the  Septuagint 
does  the  same  for  the  luhole  Old  Testament  ct  coiqjle  of 
centimes  later. 

But  in  minor  details  the  existing  copies  of  the 
Septuagint  do  not  always  exactly  correspond  with  our 
Hebrew  Bible  of  to-day.  In  Jeremiah  and  Daniel, 
and  also  in  the  historical  books,  there  are  many  dis- 
crepancies, some  very  trifling,  some  more  important ; 
and  also  in  other  books  in  a  lesser  degree.  A  fair 
illustration  of  the  average  amount  of  variation  may  be 
had  by  comparison  of  the  Bible  and  Prayer-book  ver- 
sions of  the  Psalms.  The  Bible  is,  of  course,  trans- 
lated from  the  Hebrew,  but  the  Prayer-book  version 
is  descended  from  the  unrevised  Septuagint,  and  has 
many  minor  variations,  and  even  one  rather  serious 
one — the  addition  to  the  14  th  Psalm  of  several  verses 
which  have  no  right  at  all  to  be  there,  and  which  do 
not  exist  in  the  best  copies  of  the  Septuagint. 


THE  MEN  OF  THE  GREAT  SYNAGOGUE.        7^ 

In  the  Pentateuch,  the  Septnagint  and  our  Hebrew 
Bible  are  almost  entirely  the  same.  It  is  a  significant 
fact  as  to  the  purity  of  transmission  of  the  Pentateuch 
that,  while  in  the  late  revision  the  margin  of  i  Samuel 
alone  contains  thirty  references  to  Septuagint  varia- 
tions, that  of  the  whole  Pentateuch  together  contains 
only  four ! 

Now,  what  are  we  to  say  as  to  these  discrepancies 
in  the  Septuagint  version  ?  Are  we  to  discredit  them, 
as  we  have  done  in  the  case  of  our  former  witness, 
the  Samaritan  Bible,  or  must  they  be  received  as  proof 
that  the  manuscripts  of  Great  Synagogue  days  did  not 
exactly  correspond  with  ours  ? 

Well,  some  of  these  discrepancies  clearly  arise  from 
mistakes  in  the  Septuagint  itself.  At  its  best  it  was 
not  a  very  accurate  version  of  the  Palestine  Bible,  as 
the  reader  will  see  for  himself  later  on ;  and  to  make 
matters  worse,  its  existing  copies  have  become  greatly 
corrupted  in  the  course  of  ages. 

Nevertheless,  after  all  allowance  for  the  faults  of 
the  Septuagint,  there  are  certain  of  its  variations  from 
our  Hebrew  Bible  which  it  is  evident  to  any  scholarly 
critic  must  be  traced  back  to  the  Hebrew  manuscripts 
which  lay  before  its  translators  as  they  wrote  two 
thousand  years  ago — variations,  for  example,  for  which 
we  cannot  imagine  any  other  possible  explanation,  or 
variations  which  are  confirmed  by  other  ancient  ver- 
sions independent  of  the  Septuagint.  These  must 
have  originated  in  the  Hebrew  manuscripts  before 
them. 


74  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

True,  these  manuscripts  before  them  were  very 
likely  not  at  all  as  accurate  as  those  of  the  Palestine 
Jews,  and  this  fact  must  be  allowed  for  in  weighing 
their  evidence. 

Not  to  obscure  the  subject  by  over-minuteness  of 
explanation,  let  it  suffice  here  to  state  the  belief  among 
scholars  generally  as  the  result  of  this  comparison  with 
the  Septuagint  Bible,  that  while  the  "  Great  Syna- 
gogue" manuscripts  were  in  close  substantial  agree- 
ment with  our  own,  yet  they  were  not  absohitcly  word 
for  word  uniform  with  ours,  or  even  with  each  other. 
There  are  plain  traces  of  the  existence  of  variations, 
though  of  a  trivial  and  superficial  kind. 

VI. 

The  "Abomination  of  Desolation." 

B.C.  1 68.  An  awful  interruption  in  the  work  of 
the  Scribes !  A  tremendous  crisis  in  the  history  of 
the  Jevv^ish  Bible ! 

"  0  God,  the  heathen  are  come  into  Thine  inhe- 
ritance ;  Thy  holy  Temple  have  they  defiled,  and  made 
Jerusalem  an  heap  of  stones !  The  dead  bodies  of 
Thy  servants  have  they  given  to  be  meat  unto  the 
fowls  of  the  air,  and  the  flesh  of  Thy  saints  unto  the 
beasts  of  the  land.  Their  blood  have  they  shed  like 
water  on  every  side  of  Jerusalem,  and  there  was  no 
man  to  bury  them  !  "  ^ 

How  should  I  tell  in  a  passing  paragraph  that  story 

^  Ps.  Ixxix.,  most  probably  written  at  this  period. 


THE  MEN  OF  THE  GREAT  SYNAGOGUE.        75 

of  the  Maccabean  days,  curdling  one's  very  blood  with 
horror,  while  yet  making  every  nerve  thrill  high  with 
the  fierce  excitement  of  battle  and  revenge !  In  the 
pages  of  Josephus,  in  the  Books  of  the  Maccabees, 
find  the  story,  and  study  it  for  yourself,  my  reader — 
the  invasion  of  Antiochus,  the  mad  Syrian  king ;  the 
raid  not  chiefly  against  city  and  people,  but  against 
God  and  religion  and  the  holy  manuscripts,  the  most 
sacred  treasure  of  the  Jewish  race. 

Read  of  the  patriots  turning  at  bay,  of  the  town 
and  Temple  walls  bespattered  with  blood,  of  Bibles 
torn  asunder  and  burned  in  the  fire,  of  the  fierce  rage 
of  men,  of  the  wailing  of  women,  of  the  great  sow 
slaughtered  in  insult  in  the  Temple  itself,  and  the 
broth  of  its  filthy  flesh  sprinkled,  amid  shouts  of 
laughter,  on  the  sacred  parchments  !  ^ 

Look  to  the  heights  at  the  battle  of  Emmaus, 
where  fierce  Judas  the  Maccabee  prepares  for  re- 
venge ;  see  the  mourners  in  sackcloth  calling  upon 
God,  spreading  out  in  the  sunlight  before  Him  the 
charred  and  torn  fragments  of  their  holy  books, 
defiled  by  touch  of  the  accursed  Greeks,  and  j)ainted  all 
over  in  wanton  insult  with  the  obscene  figures  of  their 
heathen  gods."  Ay,  and  though  it  does  not  concern 
this  history,  look  a  little  longer  still ;  hear  the  fierce 
trumpet- blast  of  Israel's  host;  see  the  stern  warriors 
sweeping  down  from  the  hills  crying  for  vengeance  to 
the  God  of  Sabaoth. Enough   of  the  wild  story. 

^  Josephus,  Antiquities,  xii.  5.  4;  Diod.  Sic,  xxxiv.  i. 
2  I  Maccabees  iii.  46-50. 


76  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

Full  well  that  day  did  they  avenge  their  wrongs,  when 
the  blood  of  a  thousand  of  the  Syrian  host  atoned  for 
the  swine-broth  sprinkled  on  the  Bible. 

What  would  the  world  do,  men  ask,  if  it  lost  the 
Bible  ?  Did  you  ever  think,  did  you  ever  know, 
reader,  how  nearly,  humanly  speaking,  the  world  had 
lost  it — the  Old  Testament  at  least,  and  all  of  the 
New  which  was  quarried  from  the  old  ?  The  destruc- 
tion of  a  few  parchments  flung  into  the  fire  meant 
very  little  for  the  Syrian  soldiers ;  for  us  it  went 
perilously  nigh  to  mean  the  Hebrew  Bible  swept  away 
for  ever ! 

Nor  was  the  danger  over  then.  Solemnly,  lovingly, 
as  the  relics  of  the  dead,  were  these  sacred  remnants 
cherished  by  the  nation,  and  new  fair  copies  soon 
replaced  the  old,  copies  perhaps  honoured  by  the 
touch  of  Christ.  And  then — another  scene  of  horror, 
another  time  of  peril  to  the  holy  books,  and  Jerusalem 
was  captured,  and  the  Temple  lay  in  ruins,  and  in  the 
pile  of  the  proud  Eomans'  trophies  lay  the  Temple 
manuscript  of  the  Books  of  Moses. -^ 

And  yet  again,  a  half-century  later,  in  the  final 
struggle  of  the  Jews  at  Bethur,  when  Scribes  and 
manuscripts  together  were  flung  in  hundreds  into  the 
raging  flames.  Surely  a  higher  than  human  care  was 
guarding  that  old  Hebrew  Bible ! 

1  Joseplms,  Jewish  Wars,  vii.  5.  5. 


CHAPTER    VII. 

THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

THE  TALMUD  PERIOD. 

I. 

The  College  of  Tiberias. 

With  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  begins  a  new  era 
in  the  "  Story  of  the  Hebrew  Manuscripts."  The  State 
was  broken  up  ;  the  Temple  was  in  rains  ;  it  seemed  as 
if  all  now  might  well  be  at  an  end.  But  no.  From 
the  moment  that  their  national  life  died  out  at  the 
destruction  of  the  holy  city,  the  Jews,  with  nothing 
left  to  live  for  in  the  jDresent,  threw  themselves  heart 
and  soul  into  the  preservation  of  the  relics  of  their 
glorious  past.  The  sacred  writings  were  everything 
to  them — their  title-deeds,  their  national  records,  their 
covenant  with  Jehovah.  And  so  upon  the  sacred 
writings  their  attention  was  centred  with  an  earnest- 
ness such  as  never  had  been  known  before.  Religion 
and  patriotism  united  to  inspire  their  reverence. 
Every  word,  every  letter,  became  holy  in  their  eyes. 

Quickly  the  centres  of  learning  grew  for  the  study 
of  the  Hebrew  Scriptures.      At  Japhneh,   at  Lydda, 


78  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

at  C^esarea,  famous  academies  arose  where  grammar 
and  criticism  and  interpretation  were  tanglit.  But 
famous  above  all  were  the  schools  of  Tiberias  looking 
out  on  the  waters  of  the  sacred  lake.  Travellers  who 
now  visit  the  decaying  little  town  remind  us  of  the 
glory  of  its  ancient  days — of  turret  and  dome  and 
sculptured  figure — of  Herod's  golden  palace  flashing 
in  the  sun.  Seldom  do  we  hear  of  the  greater  glory, 
when  Herod  and  his  golden  palace  were  forgotten, 
when  earnest  students  paced  its  terraced  paths  in  high 
communings  with  the  sages  of  their  j^eople,  when 
its  archives  were  the  treasuries  of  Biblical  lore,  and 
the  fame  of  its  great  schools  was  spread  throughout 
the  Jewish  world. 

It  was  the  last  retreat  of  old  Judaism  in  Palestine 
before  the  advancing  wave  of  Christianity.  The  Jewish 
element  reigned  supreme.  Not  heathen  or  Samaritan 
or  dog  of  a  Christian  could  find  a  resting-place  within 
its  walls.  It  was  the  great  university  of  the  Hebrew 
world,  and  many  a  glorious  name  figured  on  its  roll. 
Rabbi  Judah  the  Holy  was  one  of  its  teachers,  and 
Eabbi  Johanan  of  Talmud  fame,  Aquila  and  Symma- 
chus,  the  great  Bible  translators,^  were  pupils  in  its 
halls  of  the  Rabbi  Akiba,  whose  life-story  forms  one 
of  the  most  romantic  chapters  in  the  whole  of  the 
Hebrew  literature.  And  even  when  its  golden  days 
were  over,  when,  retreating  before  the  spread  of  Chris- 
tianit}^  it  had  sent  forth  its  greatest  students  into 
other  lands,  the  glory  of  the  old  academy  lived  again 

^  See  Book  ii.  p.  158. 


THE  TALMUD  PERIOD.  79 

in  the  glory  of  lier  children,  and  Tiberias  was  almost 
eclipsed  by  the  Babylon  schools  on  the  banks  of  the 
far  Euphrates. 

II. 
The  Makers  of  the  Tahnud. 

In  almost  every  Jewish  academy  the  whole  course 
of  study  was  connected  with  the  Scriptures,  especially 
with  the  Mosaic  books.  When  Kabbi  Ishmael  was 
asked  at  what  time  the  "  Greek  wisdom  "  might  be 
studied,  "At  some  hour,"  said  he,  "which  is  neither 
day  nor  night,  for  it  is  written  concerning  the  Book 
of  the  Law,  '  Day  and  night  thou  shalt  meditate 
therein '  "  (Joshua  i.  8). 

It  was  not  altogether,  though,  such  a  study  as  we 
should  approve  of.  Much  attention  was  given  to  the 
traditional  explanations  of  the  Torah  or  Law  of  Moses, 
and  the  systematic  collection  of  these  traditions  into 
what  was  called  the  Mishna.  In  course  of  time,  fear- 
ing lest  this  oral  Mishna  should  become  lost  or  cor- 
rupted, it  was  committed  to  writing,  chiefly  under  the 
care  of  Eabbi  Judah  and  his  confreres  in  the  College 
of  Tiberias.  And  then  there  grew  to  it  a  series  of 
commentaries  or  "  Gemaras,"  both  in  Palestine  and 
Babylon,  till  at  length  these  increasing  "traditions  of 
men  "  about  the  Scriptures  threatened  to  bury  altogether 
the  Scriptures  themselves.  The  Mishna,  together  with 
its  Gemara  or  commentary,  made  up  what  is  called 
The  Talmud.      And  by  degrees  this  Talmud  grew  to  be 


8o  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

to  them  more  important  than  the  Scriptures  them- 
selves. "  He  that  is  learned  in  the  Scriptures,"  said 
they,  "  and  not  in  the  Mishna,  is  a  blockhead.  The 
Law  was  given  to  Moses  by  day,  the  Mishna  by 
night.  The  Law  is  like  salt,  the  Mishna  like  pepper, 
the  Gemara  like  balmy  spice."  And  thus  their  devo- 
tion to  the  Talmud  became  the  very  curse  of  Judaism. 
Professing  to  be  the  hedge  and  safeguard  of  the 
Scriptures,  it  was  really  "making  void  the  Word  of 
God  by  its  tradition,  teaching  for  doctrines  the  com- 
mandments of  men." 


III. 
Their  ''  Biblical  Criticism." 

Fault-finding,  however,  is  an  ungracious  task,  espe- 
cially with  men  to  whom  we  owe  so  much  as  we  do  to 
the  Talmud  Scribes.  The  making  of  the  Talmud — 
we  shall  hear  more  of  it  hereafter — was  but  part  of 
their  work.  For  the  other  part — their  critical  care  of 
the  Hebrew  text — the  world  cannot  be  too  thankful. 

It  is  not  easy  to  define  exactly  what  they  accom- 
plished, for  the  work,  as  we  have  seen,  was  begun  by 
the  Scribes,  in  the  period  before  them,  and  finished 
long  afterwards  in  the  days  of  the  Massorets.  They 
did  not  attempt  anything  like  a  regular  revision. 
They  marked  certain  readings  that  seemed  to  them 
doubtful.  If  they  met  with  a  clear  mistake  they  cor- 
rected it  in  the  margin,  but  seldom  or  never  meddled 
with  the  text.      They  gave  minute   directions  about 


THE  TALMUD  PERIOD.  8i 

copying  of  manuscripts  and  cautions  about  such  errors 
as  similar  letters.  They  counted  the  number  of  verses 
and  words  in  each  book  in  order  to  preserve  it  from 
future  corruption.  They  recorded,  but  in  a  rambling, 
unmethodical  way,  the  textual  notes  of  their  prede- 
cessors for  centuries  before. 

The  Talmud  contains  many  traces  of  their  rough- 
and-ready  method  of  Biblical  criticism.  It  enumerates 
certain  words  which  they  found  in  their  Bible  manu- 
scripts with  a  little  mark  already  placed  over  them, 
thus  showing  us  that  at  least  some  rude  sort  of  textual 
criticism  existed  even  before  their  days.  These  same 
words  may  be  seen  in  our  Hebrew  Bible  to-day  with 
this  mark  above  them,  supposed  by  some  to  be  the 
"  tittle "  referred  to  by  our  Lord,  and  probably  indi- 
cating originally  words  that  were  omitted  in  some 
manuscripts. 

Their  simple  method  of  choosing  between  two  vary- 
ing readings  in  different  manuscripts  would  certainly 
not  satisfy  our  revisers  of  the  Jerusalem  Chamber, 
with  their  perfect  critical  apparatus  beside  them. 
There  is  a  Talmud  note,  for  instance,  on  Deut.  xxxiii. 
27  where  the  manuscripts  disagreed  as  to  a  certain 
word.  ''  Kabbi  Simeon -ben-Lakish  said  that  three 
copies  were  found  in  the  hall  of  the  Temple.  In  one 
of  them  they  found  written  ''^I^D  (Meoni),  in  two  of 
them  njl^/D  (Meonah),  and  they  adopted,  therefore, 
the  text  of  the  two  against  that  of  the  one." 

It  was  certainly  a  very  mechanical  mode,  and  one 
that  might  easily  have  often  set  them  wrong,  for  in 


82  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

manuscripts,  as  in  men,  truth  is  by  no  means  always 
with  the  majority.  But  it  was  the  best  way  they 
knew.  And,  all  things  considered,  we  may  be  thank- 
ful for  their  hard  and  fast  rule  of  deciding  by  majority 
instead  of  arbitrarily  choosing,  with  their  fanciful  and 
unscientific  minds,  what  might  seem  to  them  the  best 
readings.  Anyhow,  the  fact  that  they  shrank  from 
introducing  any  changes  into  the  text,  and  merely 
kept  them  in  the  margin — for  a  long  time,  indeed, 
only  in  their  memories — does  much  to  secure  the  text 
even  when  they  decided  on  the  wrong  word. 

But  the  great  security  of  the  text  amongst  the 
Talmudists  is  the  extreme  reverence  and  awe  with 
which  it  was  regarded.  Human  nature  is  a  strange 
compound.  The  very  men  who  practically  were  put- 
ting their  commentary  in  the  place  of  the  Bible  almost 
worshipped  the  letter  of  that  Bible  itself.  They  wrote 
every  word  in  it  with  scrupulous  care ;  they  washed 
their  pens  before  the  Holy  Name ;  they  dared  not 
alter  even  a  plain  mistake  except  by  a  correction  in 
the  margin  of  the  text.  "  My  son,"  said  Eabbi 
Ishmael,  "  take  great  heed  how  thou  doest  thy  w^ork, 
for  thy  work  is  the  work  of  Heaven,  lest  thou  drop 
or  add  a  letter  of  the  manuscript,  and  so  become  a 
destroyer  of  the  world."  Never  were  saintly  relics 
reverenced  as  were  these  old  manuscripts.  Never  was 
a  book  so  marvellously  guarded.  Nothing,  surely,  but 
the  conviction  that  ' '  to  them  were  committed  the 
oracles  of  God  "  could  account  for  such  a  jealous  care.-^ 

1  We  have  little  conception  of  the  awe  and  reverence  of  the  Jews 


THE  TALMUD  PERIOD.  83, 

IV. 

The  Bible  of  the  Academies. 

Now,  what  was  the  condition  of  this  carefully- 
guarded  Bible  of  the  academies  in  the  early  Christian 
centuries  as  compared  with  that  of  our  present  Masso- 
retic  manuscripts  ? 

Though  there  are  no  Hebrew  manuscripts  of  this 
period  remaining,  yet  by  means  of  Greek  and  other 
translations  we  can  investigate  the  text  up  almost  to 
the  days  of  our  Lord.  There  are  three  celebrated 
Greek  versions — those  of  Aquila,  Symmachus,  and 
Theodotion,  made  before  the  year  200  a.d.^  The  first 
two  of  these  writers  are  said  to  have  been  students  in 
the  College  of  Tiberias,  and  therefore  would  be  wit- 
nesses of  the  most  approved  Palestine  text.  Now,  a 
scholar  can  easily  turn  these  translations  back  into 
their  original  Hebrew,  and  then  they  are  found  to 
agree,  not  exactly,  but  very  closely,  with  the  existing 
manuscripts — much  more  closely  than  the  Septuagint 
version  or  the  Pentateuch  of  the  Samaritans. 

The  Syriac  (Peshitto)  version  of  the  second  century  is 
also  clearly  founded  on  Hebrew  manuscripts  like  ours, 

to  this  day  for  the  words  of  the  holy  tongue.  Even  if  it  be  not  Scrii^- 
ture,  merely  a  leaf  of  the  Hebrew  Prayer-book  which  has  got  torn  or 
has  fallen  on  the  floor,  it  is  touched  with  a  superstitious  awe,  as  an 
idolator  would  touch  his  idol.  To  be  sure,  with  the  lower  classes  it  is 
more  superstition  than  any  real  feeling  of  religion.  The  writer  was 
told  by  an  eye-witness  the  other  day  of  a  Jewish  boy  treading  inad- 
vertently on  such  a  page,  and  receiving  from  his  horrified  father  a  blow 
that  almost  felled  him  to  the  ground. 

^  For  an  account  of  these  Versions  see  Book  ii.  p.  158. 


84  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

and  tlie  Targums  (i.e.,  translations  into  the  common 
vernacular  of  tlie  Jews)  seem  to  have  precisely  the 
same  text  underlying  them. 

About  A.D.  230  we  have  the  testimony  of  Origen, 
the  best  scholar  of  his  age,  who  undertook  to  compare 
in  parallel  columns  the  Hebrew  with  the  Septuagint, 
and  the  three  other  Greek  versions  just  mentioned. 
His  evidence  is  to  the  same  effect,  with  this  addition, 
that  the  Hebrew  manuscripts  of  his  day  seem  to  have 
been  almost  uniform  in  text.  He  seems  never  to 
think  of  any  variations,  but  to  have  before  him  a 
standard  Hebrew  text,  with  which  he  labours  to  bring 
the  versions  into  agreement. 

As  we  come  down  towards  the  year  400,  the  exist- 
ence of  the  present  Massoretic  text  is  perfectly  clear. 
St.  Jerome,  the  only  Hebrew  scholar  of  his  day  in 
the  Western  Church,  made  his  famous  Vulgate  version 
from  manuscripts  almost  exactly  the  same  as  ours.  He 
points  out  certain  errors  in  the  Septuagint  which  he 
says  "  do  not  agree  with  the  Hebrew,"  and  quotes  the 
Hebrew  exactly  as  it  is  now.  He  also,  curiously 
enough,  writes  out  certain  Hebrew  verses  in  ordinary 
Roman  letters,  showing  us  not  only  that  he  had  it  in 
the  passages  quoted  word  for  word  as  we  have,  but 
also  that  he  pronounced  the  words  with  the  same 
vowels  as  ours,  though  there  were  no  vowel  points  in 
existence  in  his  time.  Of  course,  they  were  Palestine 
manuscripts  that  he  used.  His  teachers  were  all 
seribes  from  the  Palestine  schools.  He  tells  us  of 
one  who  used  to  come  by  night  to  him,  like  Nicodemus, 


THE  TALMUD  PERIOD.  85 

"  secretly  for  fear  of  the  Jews ; "  and  in  his  preface 
to  the  Books  of  Chronicles  he  mentions  a  doctor  from 
the  College  of  Tiberias,  in  high  esteem  among  the 
Hebrews,  as  his  principal  instructor  and  helper  in 
the  work.^ 

V. 

The  "  Palestine  Text." 

We  trace,  then,  back  to  the  days  of  our  Lord  a 
Hebrew  text  almost  exactly  the  same  as  that  which 
has  come  down  to  us  in  the  Massoretic  manuscripts. 
We  have  seen,  too,  that,  from  the  care  bestowed  on  it 
before  that  time,  we  are  justified  in  believing  that,  with 
some  slight  variations,  it  is  the  identical  text  of  the 
"  Great  Synagogue  "  days,  when  many  of  the  authors 
of  the  later  books  were  alive.  Though  there  is  but 
little  material  for  our  history  in  the  still  earlier  period, 
all  the  evidence  goes  to  show  the  marvellously  correct 
transmission  of  the  Mosaic  writings ;  and  whatever 
variations  existed  in  the  manuscripts  of  the  later  books, 
we  have  every  reason  to  believe  were  corrected  as  far 
as  possible  in  the  Great  Synagogue  days,  when  the 
separate  books  were  collected  into  a  "  Bible." 

The  reader  will  keep  in  mind  that  we  are  dealing 
with   the   text   as   itsecl   hy  the  Palestine   Jews.      The 

^  One  of  his  teachers  was  the  Rabbi  Barrabanus,  whose  name,  as  a 
great  stroke  of  wit,  was  shortened  into  Barrabas  by  one  of  Jerome's  assail- 
ants. He  is  abusing  Jerome  for  finding  errors  in  the  Septuagint,  and 
triumphantly  demands,  "  Which  are  most  likely  to  be  right,  the  seventy 
translators  guided  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  or  the  one  translator  guided  by 
Barrabas  ? "     Humour  was  not  a  strong  point  with  these  old  fathers. 


86  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

Samaritan  Pentateucli  and  the  (Greek)  Septuagint 
represent  long-lost  manuscripts,  differing  more  or  less 
from  this.  They  form  a  very  interesting  study,  and 
in  some  instances,  as  we  shall  see,  suggest  the  true 
readings  in  cases  where  the  received  text  is  faulty. 
But  we  cannot  depend  on  them.  Our  chief  reason 
for  believing  in  the  superior  accuracy  of  the  existing 
Hebrew  Scriptures  is,  that  they  contain  the  Palestine 
text,  which  has  been  for  all  these  ages  in  the  hands 
of  scholarly  priests  and  scribes,  and  guarded  with  the 
most  scrupulous  care.  The  manuscripts  used  for  the 
Septuagint  were  in  the  hands  of  men  who,  as  far  as 
we  can  judge,  had  neither  the  same  Hebrew  scholar- 
ship, the  same  frightened  awe  about  the  letter  of  the 
text,  nor  the  same  strict  notions  of  a  copyist's  work 
which  obtained  amongst  the  Palestine  Jews.  In 
Alexandria  especially,  the  home  of  the  Septuagint, 
the  tendency  was  towards  a  much  freer  dealing  with 
Scripture  than  the  rigid  formal  literalism  of  the  Jews 
of  Palestine  would  allow.  The  sense,  not  the  very 
words  and  letters,  was  the  chief  consideration,  and 
they  would  probably  not  hesitate  to  slightly  expand  or 
alter  the  form  of  an  expression,  if  thus  they  could 
express  the  sense  more  clearly. 

Now,  it  is  evident  that  this  tone  of  mind,  healthy  as 
it  is  in  a  student  or  expositor,  is  by  no  means  con- 
ducive to  an  accurate  preserving  and  transmitting  of 
the  text.  The  Palestine  temper  was  the  very  opposite. 
Bo  it  narrowness  and  superstition,  be  it  worship  of 
the  letter  while  neglecting   the   spirit,  be   it   foolish 


THE  TALMUD  PERIOD.  87 

mysticism  about  the  meaning  of  trifles,  be  it  what 
it  may,  the  fear  and  reverence  engendered  for  every 
jot  and  tittle  of  the  sacred  writings  has  been,  in  God's 
providence,  a  most  marvellous  safeguard  in  the  correct 
transmission  of  the  Old  Testament  in  Palestine. 


CHAPTER   VIII. 

THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

THE  DAYS  OF  THE  MASSORETES. 

I. 

Who  were  the  Massoretes? 

After  the  completion  of  tlie  Talmud  in  the  fifth 
century  the  academies  were  freer  than  ever  for  the 
study  of  the  sacred  text.  We  have  seen  that  in  the 
previous  periods  a  number  of  oral  traditions  had  been 
gradually  accumulating  respecting  the  right  method  of 
reading  the  text,  the  accuracy  of  certain  passages,  &c. 
These  had  grown  to  a  considerable  body  of  notes  at 
the  close  of  the  Talmud  period,  but  were  preserved 
only  in  a  confused  way  in  the  traditions  of  various 
academies,  and  in  the  memories  of  various  Rabbis. 
But  as  the  circumstances  of  their  national  life  made  it 
increasingly  difficult  to  preserve  these  oral  traditions, 
it  now  became  desirable  to  collect  them  into  some 
order  and  commit  them  to  writing,  and  this  was  the 
beginning  of  the  written  Massorah,  so  famous  in  the 
history  of  the  Hebrew  text.  It  will  be  remembered 
that   for   ages   all   these   notes   and   corrections   were 


THE  DAYS  OF  THE  MASSORETES.  89 

oral,  handed  down  by  tradition  through  the  colleges 
of  the  Scribes  from  one  generation  to  another.  They 
were,  therefore,  always  referred  to  as  the  Massorah-. 
i.e.,  the  tradition  ;  the  men  who  collected  and  committed 
them  to  writing  are  called  the  Massoeetes,  and  the| 
text  which  these  scholars  have  handed  down  to  us 
certified  as  in  their  opinion  correct  is  known  as  the 
Massoretic   text.     In  the  hands  of   the   Massoretic 


Scribes  the  original  deposit  was  greatly  enlarged  and 
improved.  They  arranged  into  a  complete  commentary 
the  remarks  of  their  predecessors.  They  examined 
the  manuscripts  critically  and  completely,  whereas  the 
Talmudists  had  but  made  disconnected  notes.  They 
studied  the  languages,  the  grammar,  the  interpretation 
of  the  Scriptures.  They  invented  the  vowel  points 
and  accents  to  stereotype  the  correct  reading. 

Thus  slowly  and  gradually  the  Massorah  ^  grew.  It 
belongs  not  to  any  one  age  or  any  one  set  of  scholars. 
It  began  probably  with  a  few  short  technical  notes  to 
guard  against  copyists'  blunders  in  places  liable  to 
error,  and  gradually  grew  during  many  ages  into  a 
commentary  on  the  whole  text,  a  great  "  critical 
apparatus"  for  the  amending  and  preserving  of  the 
Old  Testament  Scriptures. 

Therefore,  though  we  apply  the  term  to  the  men  of 
the  period  who  completed  and  wrote  the  Massorah,  the 
Massoretes,  in  truth,  might  be  said  to  have  existed 

^  The  reader  must  keep  clearly  in  mind  that  the  Massorah  was  not 
the  text  itself,  but  the  mass  of  critical  and  other  notes  concerning  the 
text. 


90  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

almost  from  the  days  of  Ezra.  "  Indeed/'  says  Elias 
Levita,  "there  were  hundreds  and  thousands  of  Mas- 
soretes,  and  they  continued,  generation  after  generation, 
for  very  many  years." 

Dr.  Ginsburg,  the  highest  living  authority,  puts  the 
beginning  of  the  Massorah  about  three  centuries  before 
Christ,  and  it  was  not  completed  for  1 300  years.  What 
we  have  here  designated  as  the  '*  days  of  the  Masso- 
retes,"  i.e.,  the  period  when  the  Massorah  was  com- 
lipleted  and  written  out,  may  be  roughly  set  down  at 
from  500  to  1000  A.D. 


II. 
Contents  of  the  Massorah. 

A  merely  general  notion  of  the  contents  of  the 
Massorah  is  all  that  can  be  given  here.  It  deals 
minutely  with  the  books,  sections,  verses,  words, 
letters,  vowel  points,  accents,  and  such  matters.  It 
gives  conjectures,  or,  where  possible,  definite  correc- 
tions, of  anything  apparently  wrong  in  the  text.  It 
indicates  where  anything  was  supposed  to  have  been 
added  or  left  out  or  altered,  or  whether  certain  words 
were  written  with  or  without  the  vowel  letters  (see 
p.  68).  It  puts  particular  marks  on  words  about 
which  there  was  anything  in  the  least  unusual.  It 
records  the  "various  readings."  It  counts  up  the  verses, 
the  words,  even  the  letters  of  the  separate  books,  and 
invents  mnemonic  signs  by  which  to  remember  them 


>.     r-     a: 


THE  DAYS  OF  THE  MASSORETES.  91 

easily.  It  tells  how  often  tlie  same  word  occurs  at 
the  beginning,  middle,  or  end  of  a  verse.  It  gives 
the  middle  verse,  the  middle  word,  the  middle  letter, 
of  each  book  of  the  Law,  &c.,  &c. 

But  to  continue  a  long  enumeration  of  this  kind 
will  probably  but  confuse  the  reader.  Clearness  is 
more  important  to  aim  at  than  completeness.  There- 
fore it  will  be  best  rather  to  try  by  means  of  a  few 
examples  in  simple  form  to  leave  in  the  reader's  mind 
a  distinct,  even  if  a  very  partial,  notion  of  what  the 
Massorah  contains. 


III. 
Its  Two  Classes  of  Notes. 

At  first  the  Massorah  notes  existed  only  in  separate 
books  and  sheets,  which  were  used  in  the  public 
lectures  of  the  Scribes.  Afterwards,  for  convenience' 
sake,  they  were  transferred  to  the  margin  of  the  Old 
Testament  manuscripts.  But  this  was  very  clumsily 
done.  The  remarks  were  not  always  placed  on  the 
same  page  with  the  verse  to  which  they  belonged.  The 
writers  had  a  fashion,  too,  of  making  them  up  into  all 
sorts  of  fancy  shapes,  of  men  and  fishes  and  flowers 
and  birds,  as  shown  in  the  opposite  photograph.  If 
there  was  too  much  matter  for  the  figure,  they  did 
not  hesitate  to  transfer  the  overplus  to  the  end  of 
the  book;  if  too  little,  they  calmly  inserted  bits  from 
other  places  to  fill   up  the  gap.      Thus  it  became  a 


92  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

Herculean  task  to  reduce  the  Massorali  into  anything 
like  order. 

The  notes,  for  the  most  part,  might  be  brought  under 
two  separate  heads  referring  to  : — 

(i.)  What  IS  in  the  text.  An  elaborate  system  of 
rules  and  annotations  intended  to  secure  the  exact 
transmission  of  the  text  before  them  in  the  smallest 
particulars,  to  preserve  from  corruption  every  jot  and 
tittle  of  the  Scriptures. 

(2.)  What  SHOULD  BE  in  the  text.  Corrections  of 
mistakes  and  guesses  about  doubtful  readings,  which, 
however,  they  did  not  venture  to  meddle  with  in  the 
text  itself,  but  only  recorded  in  the  margin  of  the 
manuscript. 


IV. 

What  Is  in  the  Text. 

(i.)  As  the  first  illustration  of  the  notes  con- 
cerning WHAT  IS  IN  THE  TEXT,  I  take  an  extract  from 
the  "  Massoreth  -  Hammassoreth  "  of  Elias  Levita,  a 
medigeval  writer  on  the  Massorah,  whom  I  have 
referred  to  already — 

"  The  Massoretes  by  their  diligence  have  learned  and 
marked  that  the  ")  in  pn^  (Lev.  xi.  42)  is  the  middle 
of  all  the  letters  of  the  Pentateuch  ;  that  '  Moses 
diligently  soiight '  (Lev.  x.  1 6)  is  the  middle  of  all  the 
words ;  that  *  the  breastplate '  verse  (Lev.  viii.  8)  is 
the  middle  of  all  the  verses.     This  they  have  done  in 


THE  DAYS  OF  THE  MASSORBTES.  93 

all  the  sacred  books.  Moreover,  they  have  counted 
the  verses,  words,  and  letters  of  each  section  in  the 
Pentateuch,  and  made  marks  accordingly.  Thus  the 
section  '  Bereshith '  (the  first  section  in  Genesis)  has 
146  verses,  the  sign  is  amaziah."  He  means  that  the 
Hebrew  letters  having  regular  numerical  values  like 
our  Koman  numerals,  the  Hebrew  letters  amaziah, 
like  the  Koman  letters  CXLVi.,  denote  146,  and  thus 
make  a  mnemonic  for  the  number  of  the  verses. 

(2.)  "  They  have  also  counted  each  separate  letter 
in  the  Scriptures,  and  have  noted  that — 

"K  (A)  occurs  42,377  times. 
"a(B)       „       35,218     „       &c.,  &c. 

"Indeed,"  continues  Levita,  "a  beautiful  poem 
was  written  long  ago  on  this  subject,  beginning  *The 
Tabernacle,  the  place  of  my  court,' "  &c. 

Well,  it  is  an  ingenious  poem  anyhow,  and  a  useful 
poem  for  its  purpose  of  enabling  one  to  remember  the 
number  of  the  letters.  As  to  its  beauty,  there  is  no 
accounting  for  tastes.  I  fear,  though,  its  claim  can 
only  be  based  on  the  philosophical  principle  that  "  the 
useful  is  the  truly  beautiful,"  on  which  principle  we 
have  an  exquisitely  beautiful  poem  in  English,  begin- 
ning— 

"  Thirty  days  hath  September, 
April,  June,  and  November,"  &c. 

Here  is  the  first  stanza  of  this  "  beautiful  poem " 


94  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

on   the   letter   J<^   (A).     I    represent   the   Hebrew   by 

English  letters : — 


"AcHEL  Mekon  Benyanai, 
SHesham  Halo  Zekeenai." 

"  The  Tabernacle  is  my  court, 
Wliither  my  elders  do  resort." 

"  The  whole  congx-egation  "  For  a  sacrifice  of  peace 

together  was  forty  and  two  offering,  two  oxen,  five  rams, 

thousand  three  hundred  and  five  he  goats,  five  lambs" 

threescore"  (Neh.  vii.  66).  (Numb.  vii.  17). 


Now  for  the  explanation  of  this  "poem."  In  the 
above  Hebrew  words  the  "  A."  marks  the  letter  dis- 
cussed, the  other  initial  letters,  M.,  B.,  SH.,  H.,  Z., 
represent  numbers  whose  total  value  is  42,377,  the 
number  of  A's  in  the  Old  Testament.  To  make  assur- 
ance doubly  sure,  the  two  verses  underneath  are  added 
as  a  further  mnemonic :  the  number  of  the  congre- 
gation in  one  verse  (42,360),  and  the  number  of 
animals  in  the  other  (17),  when  added  together,  make 
the  same  number,  42,377.  Thus  every  letter  in  the 
alphabet  is  laboriously  gone  through,  with  the  pious 
object,  of  preventing  the  insertion  or  omission  of  a 
single  letter  in  the  deposit  committed  to  them  by 
God.  I  dare  say  these  precautions  were  not  always 
effectual.  It  would  require  a  high  faith  in  human 
nature  to  believe  that  every  scribe  took  the  trouble 
of  counting  and  checking  the  separate  letters  in  his 
manuscript.  Yet  it  must  have  been  in  some  degree 
a  security  against  errors,  and  in  any  case  it  shows  the 


THE  DAYS  OF  THE  MASSORETES. 


95 


care  with  which  the  appointed  record-keepers  of  God 
guarded  their  sacred  charge. 

(3.)  Again,  they  would  put  asterisks,  or  rather 
little  circles,  over  certain  words  in  a  verse,  calling 
attention  to  a  footnote.  If  the  word  occurs  only  in 
that  place  the  note  says,  "  None  other  ; "  if  more  than 
once,  it  announces,  "  three,  four,  six,  &c.,  times,** 
giviug  the  places  where  it  occurs,  something  after  the 
style  of  Cruden's  Concordance,  only  that  the  old  Mas- 
soretes  had  not  the  convenience  of  numbered  chapters 
and  verses.  These  were  usually  words  about  which  a 
copyist  might  easily  err ;  for  example,  under  the  phrase 
"  The  Spirit  of  God  "  (Elohim)  the  note  says  "  It  occurs 
8  times,"  and  indicates  the  places.  In  all  other  cases  but 
these  eight  it  is  "  The  Spirit  of  The  Lord  "  (Jehovah), 
and  the  note  keeps  the  copyist  from  dropping  into  this 
easy  mistake  of  writing  the  more  common  phrase.  They 
write  also  such  notes  as  these  : — "  There  are  two  verses 
in  the  Torah  (Law)  beginning  with  M:  eleven  verses 
in  which  the  first  and  last  letter  is  N :  there  are  forty 
verses  in  which  Lo  is  read  three  times,"  &c.  They 
explain  that  such  a  verb  is  connected  with  such  a 
noun,  such  a  word  should  be  so  construed,  and  so  on. 

(4.)  Here  is  a  curious  illustration  of  another  class 
of  notes.  I  give  it  to  show  the  marvellous  carefulness 
of  these  men,  and  how  they  considered  no  detail  too 
minute  or  insignificant  to  be  attended  to  in  their 
sacred  guardianship  of  the  Word  of  God. 


96  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

In  Joshua  ix.  I  we  read :  "  When  all  the  kings  that 
were  on  this  side  Jordan,  the  Hittite  and  the  Amorite, 
the  Canaanite,  the  Perizzite,  the  Hivite,  and  the  Jebusite, 
heard  thereof."  Here  are  six  kings  mentioned,  and 
the  conjunction  "  and "  occurs  only  twice,  before  the 
second  and  before  the  sixth.  What  possible  safe- 
guard can  there  be  to  preserve  that  insignificant  little 
word  in  its  proper  position  ?  Would  not  a  copyist,  if 
not  especially  on  his  guard,  almost  inevitably  get  it 
into  the  wrong  places  ? 

See  how  the  Massoretes  guard  against  this  danger. 
Underneath  this  verse  about  the  kings  they  put, 
in  a  footnote,  a  little  catch-word,  ''  The  gold  roK 
THE  KINGS,"  and  refer  us  to  a  certain  section  in 
the  Book  of  Numbers.  There  we  find  the  word 
Gold  in  Numb.  xxxi.  22,  which  reads  as  follows: 
''  Only  the  Gold  and  the  silver,  the  brass,  the  iron,  the 
tin,  and  the  lead."  Here  again  we  have  six  nouns,  and 
we  find  that  the  conjunction  *'  and "  is  before  the 
second  and  sixth.  Thus  we  learn  that  these  are  the 
right  positions  for  the  conjunction  in  the  verse  from 
which  we  have  been  referred.  These  two  verses  are 
thus  a  check  on  each  other — a  check  which,  though  it 
seem  slight  to  the  English  reader,  was  effective  enough 
for  the  Hebrew  Scribes,  with  their  intimate  knowledo-e 
of  and  scrupulous  care  for  every  letter  of  the  text. 
But  whatever  be  the  reader's  estimate  of  its  value,  in 
any  case  it  illustrates  the  laborious  and  accurate  care- 
fulness of  the  Massoretes. 


THE  DAYS  OF  THE  MASSORETES.  97 

V. 
What  should  be  in  the  text. 

The  above  are  examples  of  their  care  to  preserve 
uncorrupt  what  is  in  the  text.  But  sometimes  they 
had  reason  to  believe  that  the  manuscripts  before 
them  had  become  corrupted  already  in  some  places, 
and  this  necessitated  another  set  of  marginal  com- 
ments to  indicate  in  their  opinion  what  should  he  in 
the  text,  for  their  reverence  for  the  sacred  letters  {i.e., 
the  consonants)  of  the  text  itself  was  carried  so  far 
that  they  would  not  dare  to  meddle  with  them,  even 
to  correct  an  obvious  mistake.  The  reader  must  learn 
the  two  Hebrew  words  continually  used  in  this  class 
of  notes : — 

>")p  =  Keri  =  what  must  be  read. 
yn'Z  =  Kethibh  =  what  is  written. 

(l.)  Suppose,  now,  the  Massoretes,  in  making  a  new 
copy,  found  in  the  manuscript  before  them  a  word 
which  they  had  reason  to  believe  was  incorrect.  Their 
superstitious  reverence  for  the  text  would  not  allow 
them  to  correct  it  boldly.  What  then  did  they  do  ? 
They  wrote  down  in  their  new  copy  the  consonants  of 
this  incorrect  word  just  as  they  found  them.  Then 
they  wrote  in  the  margin  the  consonants  of  what  they 
believed  to  be  the  correct  word,  and  put  its  voiuels  under 
the  consonants  of  the  wrong  word  which  they  had 
just  transcribed,  with  an  asterisk  calling  attention  to 
the  margin.  This  incorrect  word  in  the  text  then 
with  these  vowels  could  not  be  read  without  making 

G 


98  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

nonsensej  so  tlie  reader  had  to  turn  to  tlie  consonants 
of  the  right  word  in  the  margin.  It  was  as  if  we 
should  print  in  our  English  Bible : — 

Bless  the  Lord,  0  my  soul,  and  ^  ^    , 

•^  *  Read  b  N  f  T  s. 

forget  not  all  His  c^MMgNDMiNTS.* 
i.e.,  "  benefi'ts "  is  the  word  that  should  be  read 
instead  of  "  commandments."  The  right  word  in  the 
margin  was  called  the  "  Keri "  (what  should  be  read). 
The  wrong  word  in  the  text  was  the  "  Kethibh  "  (that 
which  is  written).  There  is  a  good  example  in  Ps. 
xvi.  10,  where  the  text  has  "Thy  holy  ones,"  while 
the  "  Keri "  correctly  gives  the  singular  in  the  margin, 
"  Suffer  Thine  Holy  One  to  see  corruption."  The  most 
frequent  example  of  a  "  Keri "  is  the  unutterable  name 
Jhvh,  which,  owing  to  the  "  Keri,"  we  have  learned  to 
mispronounce  as  Jehovah.  No  one  can  tell  now  with 
any  certainty  what  are  its  true  vowels ;  probably  it 
should  be  read  as  Yahveh.  With  such  awe  was  the  word 
regarded  that  it  was  forbidden  to  be  uttered  by  any 
except  the  high  priest,  and  by  him  only  once  a  year 
in  the  Holy  of  Holies."^     On  all  other  occasions  the  word 

1  One  old  legend  tells  that  whenever  the  high  priest  pronounced  the 
name  it  was  heard  as  far  as  to  Jericho,  but  all  the  hearers  immediately 
forgot  it.  Later  stories  attribute  the  miracles  of  Jesus  to  His  utter- 
ance of  the  Sacred  Name,  the  true  pronunciation  of  which  He  had 
learned  in  some  mysterious  way.  But  the  most  curious  thing  about 
this  old  superstition  is  the  way  in  which  its  results  remain  to  us  still. 
In  consequence  of  it  the  Septuagint  version  always  used  the  word 
Lord  for  Jhvh,  and  through  the  Septuagint  the  habit  has  crept  not 
only  into  the  works  of  the  New  Testament  writers,  who  all  used  the 
Septuagint,  but  even  into  our  English  Old  Testament  of  to-day,  often 
very  much  spoiling  the  force  and  meaning  in  passages  where  Jehovah 
is  contrasted  with  other  gods. 


THE  DAYS  OF  THE  MASSORETES.  99 

Adonai  (Lord)  was  usually  directed  to  be  j-ead  instead, 
and  to  indicate  this  the  vowels  of  AgD^Nj  were  put  under 
the  letters  of  the  "  most  holy  word,"  thus  S^^^Mji. 

(2.)  One  class  of  the  marginal  "  Keris  "  was,  I  should 
think,  rather  a  danger  than  a  protection  to  the  text, 
though,  at  the  same  time,  one  could  wish  that  some 
of  them  were  retained  to-day  in  our  English  Bibles 
for  reading  the  Old  Testament  Lessons  in  church.  They 
are  called  euphemistic  "  Keris."  Where  a  coarse,  inde- 
corous expression  occurs  in  the  text,  the  Scribes,  while 
not  daring  to  meddle  with  the  expression  itself,  put 
in  the  margin  words  that  were  more  fitted  for  reading 
in  public,  and  the  "Keri"  directed  that  the  reader 
should  use  them  instead  of  the  others. 

3.  Sometimes  a  word  or  phrase  is  in  the  text  that 
should  he  omitted — a  usual  case  is  where  the  copyist 
has  carelessly  repeated  a  word.  The  reader  will  pro- 
bably find  examples  often  in  his  own  letter- writing  of 
such  redundancy ;  it  is  a  very  common  slip  of  writers. 
In  such  a  case  we  should  just  score  out  the  word. 
The  Massoretes  dared  not  do  this,  so  they  left  its  con- 
sonants in  the  text,  but  called  attention  to  the  error 
by  leaving  it  without  vowels,  and  writing  in  the  mar- 
gin, '' XetJiibh,  not  Keri,"  i.e.,  "Written,  but  not  to 
be  read;"^  as,  for  example,  Jer.  li.  3  :  "Against  the 
bender  let  the  archer  bend  his  bow,"  where  the  word 

1  The  Massorah  gives  eight  instances  :  Ruth  iii.  12  ;  2  Sam.  xiii.  33, 
XV.  21;  2  Kings  V.  18;  Jer.  xxxviii.  16,  xxxix.  12,  H.  3;  Ezek. 
xlviii.  16. 


TOO  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

"bender"  has  been  repeated  by  a  slip  of  some  early 
copyist,  or,  for  aught  we  know,  of  the  original  writer 
himself.      This  is  how  it  appears  in  the   Massoretic 
manuscripts : — 
AG^^NST  THg  BgNDgR  TH  BNDR  *'"  *  Kethibh,  not  Keri 

LgT  THg  ARCHER  BeND  H^S  B^W  (written  ;  not  to  be  read), 

4.  The  converse  of  this  case  occurs  very  frequently. 
The  context  clearly  shows  that  one  or  more  words 
have  been  omitted.  The  Massoretes,  of  course,  would 
not  supply  the  words,  but  leave  a  blank  wherein  they 
insert  the  voivds  required  by  the  missing  word  or 
words,  and  put  the  consonants  of  them  in  the  margin 
with  a  note,  "  Keri,  not  Kethibh,"  i.e.,  "  Should  be 
read,  though  not  written."-^  Take,  as  an  example, 
2  Sam.  viii.  3  : — 

*  PHKTS,  Keri,  not  Kethibh 
(to  be  read,  though  not  written). 

i.e.,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Massoretes,  the  word  eyPHR^^TS 
(Euphrates)  should  be  read  after  "  river." 

It  may  be  well  to  remark  here  that  these  notes, 
while  showing  the  extreme  care  of  the  Massoretes,  must 
not  always  be  regarded  as  infallible.  We  have  to  use 
our  judgment  and  the  ancient  versions  in  deciding. 
Our  English  Authorised  Version  follows  sometimes  the 
"Keri"  (marginal  correction),  sometimes  the  "Kethibh" 
(what  is  written  in  text).  The  Eevised  Version  seems 
usually  to  prefer  keeping  the   "  Kethibh  "  in  the  text 

1  The  Massorah  gives  ten  instances,  some  of  which  are  questioned  in 
the  Revised  Version  :  Judges  x.  13  ;  Ruth  iii.  5,  17  ;  2  Sam.  viii.  3, 
xvi.  23,  xviii.  20;  2  Kings  xix.  31,  37;  Jer.  xxxi.  38,  1,  29. 


THE  DAYS  OF  THE  MASSORETES.  loi 

and  leaving  the  "  Keri"  in  the  margin,  with  the  note, 
"  Another  reading  is,"  -^  &c. 

This  is  one  of  the  great  advantages  of  the  Massoretic 
reverence  for  the  letter  of  the  text.  We  not  only  get 
their  opinion  in  the  margin  as  to  the  right  reading, 
but  we  have  preserved  for  us  also  in  the  text  the  old 
reading,  which  they  rightly  or  wrongly  regarded  as 
incorrect.  If  they,  with  their  defective  knowledge  of 
textual  criticism,  had  ventured  to  correct  the  text  as 
they  thought  best,  they  would  probably  have  done  as 
much  harm  as  good,  and  the  old,  and  in  many  cases 
true,  readings  would  have  been  entirely  lost. 

VI. 

The  Vowels  and  Accents. 

The  invention  of  the  vowel-points  is  another  very 
important  part  of  the  work  of  the  Massoretes.  This 
subject  has  been  already  dealt  with  in  an  earlier 
chapter.  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  add  anything 
further  here,  except,  perhaps,  to  emphasise  the  fact 
that  the  Massoretic  vowel-system  did  not  introduce 
any  change  in  the  old  traditional  reading,  but  only 
fixed  and  stereotyped  it.  The  Massoretes  found  certain 
vowel-sounds  supplied  in  the  reading  of  the  consonant 
text.  They  merely  invented  signs  to  represent  these  i  j 
soimds,  so  that  there  should  be  no  possibility  after-  \\ 
wards  of  any  variation  in  the  reading.      These  vowel- 

^  There  are  cases,  however,  such  as  Ps.  c.  3  ;  Isa.  ix.  3,  where  the 
revisers  have  made  a  great  improvement  by  substituting  the  "  Keri " 
of  the  Massoretes  for  the  "  Kethibh,"  which  has  been  retained  in  the 
Authorised  Version  (see  specimen,  p.  206). 


I02  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

signs  they  regarded  as  a  mere  liuman  unconsecrated 
thing,  quite  external  to  the  holy  text  itself,  and  only 
used  for  convenience'  sake.^  They  never  admitted 
them  into  the  sacred  rolls  of  the  Synagogue. 

It  is,  therefore,  scarcely  necessary  to  add  that  we 
are  not  bound  to  accept  the  Massoretic  vowels  as  in- 
fallible. They  represent  the  highest  tradition  as  to 
the  correct  reading.  They  are  generally  the  only  pos- 
sible reading.  But  we  must  remember  that  the  original 
authors  of  the  Bible  wrote  only  the  consonants.  There- 
fore, if  in  any  particular  place  we  are  able  to  make 
sense  by  reading  the  vowels  differently,  it  is  quite 
possible  that  our  reading  may  be  right.  See,  for  ex- 
ample, "  Jacob's  bed  "  and  "  Jacob's  staff"  in  page  i  2. 

We  owe  to  them  also  the  Hebrew  accents,  those 
curious  marks  that  may  be  noticed  in  our  specimen 
(p.  i),  dotted  about  over  the  text.  I  despair  of 
arousing  my  readers'  enthusiasm  about  these  accents, 
mere  grammar  marks,  as  they  have  grown  to  be  to  the 
English  reader  of  Hebrew  now,  or,  at  most,  signs  for 
recording  the  true  chanting  tones  of  the  Synagogue. 
Only  the  living  voice — only,  I  think,  the  Jewish  voice 
can  convey  any  idea  of  this  beautiful  contrivance 
for  recording  the  modulations  and  inflections  of  the 
speaker's  tones.  They  almost  placed  upon  the  paper 
the  spoken  words.  They  marked  the  sense  and  logical 
connection.     They  represented  pause,  emphasis,  emo- 

^  The  story  in  Chapter  II.  of  the  controversy  about  the  vowel-points 
in  Keformation  times  refers,  of  course,  to  a  half -educated  body  of  Jews 
six  hundred  years  after  this  period. 


THE  DAYS  OF  THE  MASSORETES.  103 

tiou,  whisper,  tremulousness — everything  that  we  im- 
perfectly try  to  denote  by  italics,  and  capitals,  and 
dashes,  and  punctuation  marks.  Get  a  refined,  educated 
Jew,  an  enthusiastic  man,  capable  of  flashing  eyes  and 
trembling  excitement  over  his  subject ;  let  him  read 
for  you  a  touching  passage  in  the  Prophets  according 
to  these  accents  by  which  the  Massoretes  tried  to  re- 
produce the  original  utterance,  and  you  will — well  at 
least  you  will  probably  be  very  much  dissatisfied  with 
the  reading  of  the  First  Lesson  in  church  the  next 
Sunday. 

VII. 

Manuscript  Copying. 

Their  rules  for  copying  Synagogue  manuscripts  will 
help  to  emphasise  what  has  been  said  as  to  the  pre- 
cautions against  transcribers'  errors. 

They  must  be  transcribed  from  an  ancient  and 
approved  manuscript  solely  with  pure  black  ink  made 
of  soot,  charcoal,  and  honey,  upon  the  skin  of  a 
"clean"  animal  prepared  expressly  for  the  purpose 
by  a  Jew.  The  sheets  or  skins  are  to  be  fastened 
together  with  strings  made  from  the  sinews  of  a  clean 
animal.  The  scribe  must  not  write  a  single  word 
from  memory;  he  must  attentively  look  upon  each 
individual  word  in  his  exemplar,  and  orally  pronounce 
it  before  writing  it  down.  In  writing  any  of  the 
sacred  names  of  God,  he  must  solemnise  his  mind  by 
devotion  and  reverence ;  before  writing  any  of  them 
he  must  wash  his  pen;    before  writing  the  Ineffable 


I04  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

Name  (Jhvh)  he  must  wasli  his  whole  body.  The 
copy  must  be  examined  within  thirteen  days.  Some 
writers  assert  that  the  mistake  of  a  single  letter 
vitiates  the  entire  codex ;  others  assert  that  it  is  per- 
mitted to  correct  three  in  any  one  sheet ;  if  more 
are  found  the  copy  is  to  be  condemned  as  profane. 
Probably  many  of  the  Synagogue  rolls  in  Gentile 
libraries  to-day  are  only  these  discarded  copies."^ 


VIII. 

The  Last  of  the  Massoretes. 

Foremost  in  the  great  work  of  the  Massorah  was 
the  College  of  Tiberias,  and  away  on  the  Euphrates 
the  Babylon  schools,  now  rivalling  their  ancient  mother 
in  repute.  The  two  sets  of  scholars  worked  indepen- 
dently of  each  other,  and  did  not  always  entirely 
agree  in  their  result.  The  points  of  difference,  how- 
ever, are  of  very  minor  importance,  and  the  Western 
or  Palestine  school  ultimately  prevailed,  though  not  to 
the  entire  exclusion  of  the  other. 

I  wish,  reader,  it  were  allowed  me,  in  closing  this 
chapter,  to  write  for  you  the  story  of  "  The  Last  of  the 
Massoretes;"  to  tell  of  the  Massorah  completed  ;  of  the 
academies  broken  up  and  rude  Arab  tribes  holding 
revel  in  the  halls  ;  of  outcast  Jewish  scholars  wander- 
ing through  the  land  to  seek  precarious  shelter  in 
Germany  and  Spain.  About  the  year  when  William 
the  Conqueror  was  born  Aaron  ben-Asher   was  Prin- 

1  See  Scott  Porter,  Text  Crit.,  p.  72,  note. 


THE  DAYS  OF  THE  MASSORETES,  105 

cipal  of  the  College  of  Tiberias,  and  Jacob  ben- 
Naphtliali  of  tlie  Babylon  scliools,  and  no  man  was 
enrolled  after  them  in  the  number  of  the  Massorah 
Scribes.  Two  famous  Kabbis  were  they,  worthy  to 
close  the  long  illustrious  list  of  the  scholarly  "  men 
of  the  Massorah."  Each  of  them  exerted  his  powers 
to  the  utmost  that  his  academy  should  produce  an 
immaculate  copy  of  the  Scriptures,  and  in  such  reputa- 
tion were  their  manuscripts  held  that  they  became  the 
standards  for  the  Massoretic  text. 

But  history  affords  no  materials  for  the  story.  No 
historian  of  their  day  recognised  their  importance. 
No  chronicler  was  touched  by  the  romantic  nobleness 
of  the  task,  to  picture  the  last  days  of  the  rival 
academies  and  the  end  of  the  great  work  thirteen 
centuries  long.  Silent  and  signless  the  Massoretes 
disappeared.  Let  us  not  forget  what  we  owe  to  their 
labours.  Let  us  not  be  unmindful  of  His  good  hand 
upon  us  who  sent  them  to  preserve  for  us  the  "  Oracles 
of  God." 

IX. 

A  Mysterious  Document 

Now  that  we  have  gone  through  the  "  Story  of  the 
Manuscripts,"  we  cannot  help  feeling  that  an  important 
question  still  remains  unsolved.  What  was  the  docu- 
ment from  which  the  Massoretic  manuscripts  were 
copied  ?  No  one  can  look  over  a  number  of  these 
manuscripts,  or  even  examine  the  printed  text  of  an 
ordinary  Hebrew  Bible,  noticing  how  every  peculiarly 


io6  THE  STORY  OF  THE  MANUSCRIPTS. 

shaped  letter,  every  correction,  nay,  even  every  little 
irregularity  and  error,  is  exactly  reproduced  in  all  of 
them  alike,  without  feeling  convinced  that  there  must 
ham  heen  some  one  document  with  these  peculiarities 
which  was  made  the  archetype  or  standard  of  the  Mas- 
soretie  text.  Where  did  this  mysterious  document 
come  from  ?  Was  it  a  manuscript  made  by  the  men 
of  the  Great  Synagogue  as  the  result  of  revision? 
Was  it  one  of  the  ' '  Temple  copies "  referred  to  in 
p.  8 1  ?  Was  it  a  ''  Codex  of  Ezra,"  such  as  tradi- 
tion tells  of,  or  a  standard  selected  in  conclave  by  the 
Scribes  ?  Or  had  it  another  and  more  tragic  story — 
some  dread  crisis  in  the  history  of  the  nation — in  the 
struggle  with  Antiochus — in  the  massacre  at  Bethur  ? 
Is  there  a  lost  picture  somewhere  in  the  ancient  story 
— the  hunted  patriots  hiding  in  the  mountains ;  the 
soiled  and  torn  fragments  of  the  Hebrew  manuscripts 
gathered  together  from  their  places  of  concealment, 
of  some  of  the  books  only  two  or  three,  of  some  per- 
haps but  a  single  copy,  stained  with  blood,  shrivelled 
by  fire,  all  that  remains  to  them  of  their  sacred 
records  ? 

What  wonder  if  it  were  so  in  those  awful  days  when 
the  Bible  so  nearly  perished  altogether  !  What  won- 
der if  from  these  few  manuscripts  came  the  "  Standard 
Bible,"  the  ancestor  of  this  mysteriously  uniform  text  ? 

These  are  all  but  guesses,  reader.  We  can  only 
guess.  The  dim  past  holds  its  secret  still  as  to  the 
origin  of  this  "  Standard  Bible." 


CHAPTER  IX. 

NOTES  AND  JOTTINGS. 

After  the  dispersion  of  the  Jewish  academies  many 
Hebrew  scholars  fled  to  Europe,  especially  to  Spain, 
where  the  critical  study  of  the  Bible  and  tradition  was 
still  carried  on  The  result  of  their  work,  however,  is 
not  to  us  of  much  importance,  since  the  text  was  long 
before  this  time  completely  fixed.  Their  w^ritings  are 
chiefly  of  value  on  account  of  the  manuscripts  which 
they  had  before  them,  many  of  which  have  since  been 
lost  to  the  world. 


Amongst  the  famous  names  of  this  period  often 
met  with  in  Commentaries  on  the  Bible  are  those  of 
Aben-Ezra,  Rashi,  David  Kimchi,  and  the  great 
Maimonides,  the  Jewdsh  Luther,  of  whom  it  is  written, 
"From  Moses  of  Sinai  to  Moses  Maimonides,  no  man 
like  him  lived." 


The  first  printed  portion  of  the  Hebrew  Scripture 
was  the  Book  of  Psalms,  published  a.d.  1477. 


lo8  NOTES  AND  JOTTINGS. 

The  most  important  of  all  the  earlier  Hebrew  Bibles 
was  issued  in  the  sixteenth  century  by  Daniel  Bom- 
berg  of  Venice,  whose  editor-in-chief  was  a  very 
famous  scholar,  the  Eabbi  Jacob  -  ben  -  Chajim,  an 
African  Jew.  It  is  most  refreshing  to  watch  this  old 
Hebrew's  enthusiasm  over  his  work,  and  to  note,  even  in 
so  dry  a  document  as  an  "  Introduction  to  the  Rab- 
binical Bible,"  the  little  touches  revealing  his  character 
and  his  moral  fitness  for  so  important  a  task.  He  is 
greatly  delighted  with  his  employer's  zeal.  "  Seignior 
Daniel  Bomberg,"  he  writes,  "  did  all  in  his  power  to 
send  into  all  countries  in  order  to  search  what  may  be 
found  of  the  Massorah.  He  was  not  backward,  nor 
did  he  draw  back  his  right  hand  from  producing  gold 
out  of  his  purse  to  defray  the  expenses  of  books  and 
messengers.  .  .  .  Like  a  bear  bereft  of  her  young 
ones,  he  hastened  to  this  work,  for  he  loved  the 
daughter  of  Jacob." 

A  beautiful  trait  in  his  character  is  his  simple 
modesty  so  indicative  of  a  superior  mind.  When 
Bomberg  proposed  to  him  this  great  work,  "  I  told 
him,"  he  says,  "that  I  did  not  know  as  much  as 
he  thought,  in  accordance  with  what  we  read  at  the 
end  of  chap.  ii.  of  the  Jerusalem  Maccoth,  '  A  man 
who  knows  only  one  book  when  he  is  in  a  place 
where  he  is  respected  for  knowing  two  is  in  duty 
bound  to  say,  '  I  know  only  one  book.' " 

It  is  rather  amusing  to  compare  the  modesty  of 
ben  Chajim  with  that  of  another  great  contemporary 
worker   at   the   Massorah   notes,   Elias  Levita,   whose 


NOTES  AND  JOTTINGS.  109 

name  has  already  occurred  in  the  preceding  pages. 
"I  have  seen,"  he  says,  "that  it  is  not  good  for  this 
my  book  to  be  alone.  I  will  therefore  make  it  an 
helpmeet  for  it."  And  so  he  writes  a  poetical  intro- 
duction in  which  he  tells  how  people  could  not  under- 
stand the  Massoretic  notes  : — 

"  Till  the  day  it  was  said  to  me  by  my  estimable  friends, 
'  What  doest  thou  here,  Elias  ?    Throw  light  upon  the  Massorah. 
For  the  glory  of  God  and  Holy  Writ  explain  to  us  the  Massorah.' 
When  the  Prince  heard  me,  then  he  kissed  me  with  the  kisses 

of  his  mouth, 
Saying,  'Art  thou  that  my  lord  Elias  whose  books  are  over 

all  countries  1 ' " 


After  Bomberg's  Bible  comes  a  long  series  of  edi- 
tions reaching  down  to  the  present  century.  Much 
time  and  money  and  labour  were  expended  in  collect- 
ing and  comparing  Hebrew  manuscripts  for  the  pre- 
paration of  the  Bibles,  but  the  result  was  very  dis- 
appointing. No  discoveries  of  any  importance  were 
made ;  nothing  earlier  than  the  Massoretic  manuscripts 
could  anywhere  be  found,  and  these  were  almost  word 
for  word  the  same. 

Would  you  care  to  be  shown,  reader,  an  ancient 
picture  of  the  making  of  the  "  Standard  Hebrew 
Bible," -^  whose  origin  is  enveloped  in  mystery,  whose 
manuscripts  have  been  copied  with  such  scrupulous 
care  that  even  its  little  flaws  have  come  down  to 
1  See  Chap.  VIII.  p.  106. 


no  NOTES  AND  JOTTINGS, 

us  untouclied  ?  The  picture  rises  irresistibly  before 
me  from  a  page  of  my  Englisli  Bible. 

There  is  the  old  copyist  seated  at  his  desk  patiently 
transcribing  letter  by  letter  the  wearisome  list  of  names 
in  I  Chron.  viii.,  ix. — name  after  name — name  after 
name — in  monotonous  succession.  At  last  he  stops 
and  lays  down  his  pen.  He  has  just  written  the 
words,  "  These  dwelt  at  Jerusalem."  This  will 
do  nicely  for  a  catch-word  to  find  his  place  again 
when  he  returns,  and  so  repeating  the  words  to  him- 
self the  old  man  retires  to  rest. 

I  see  him  next  day  resuming  his  task.  He  arranges 
his  parchments,  he  looks  at  the  catch-word,  the  last  he 
has  written,  and  raising  his  eyes  to  the  manuscript 
before  him,  they  light  on  the  words,  hut  at  the  top  of 
the  preceding  page^  "  These  dwelt  at  Jerusalem," 
and  calmly  he  goes  on  from  that,  in  blissful  uncon- 
sciousness that  he  is  writing  over  again  his  yesterday's 
work. 

You  can  find  that  little  picture  for  yourself,  my 
reader,  if  you  open  your  English  Bible  at  I  Chron. 
ix.  34.  This  is  the  verse  where  the  old  scribe  stopped 
at  "  These  dwelt  at  Jerusalem  ; "  and  if  you  look  up 
to  the  28th  verse  of  the  preceding  chapter,  you  will 
find  the  same  words  in  the  line  that  caught  his  eye 
when  he  returned,  and  you  will  see  he  has  written 
over  again  after  ix.  34  a  good  deal  of  the  passage 
that  follows  viii.  28. 

Compared  with  the  vast  amount  of  labour  expended 


NOTES  AND  JOTTINGS.  m 

on  tlie  textual  criticism  of  the  New  Testament,  very  little 
indeed  has  been  done  for  the  Old.  Unfortunately, 
when  the  question  of  the  perfect  accuracy  of  the  Old 
Testament  text  was  first  started  in  the  Keformation 
days,  it  became  at  once,  like  that  of  the  vowel-points,  a 
party  contest  instead  of  an  unbiassed  search  for  the 
truth.  The  good  fathers  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  in- 
nocent of  any  knowledge  of  Hebrew  themselves,  and 
desirous  to  laud  up  the  authority  of  the  (Latin)  Vul- 
gate, the  Authorised  Version  of  the  Western  Church  of 
that  day,  threw  doubts  upon  the  correct  transmission 
of  the  Hebrew  manuscripts  in  the  hands  of  the  "  unbe- 
lieving Jews."  This,  of  course,  was  quite  enough  to 
rouse  the  Protestants  to  the  defence  of  it,  so  that  the 
accuracy  of  the  Hebrew  Old  Testament  soon  became 
with  them  almost  an  article  of  faith,  and,  like  many  of 
the  party  shibboleths  of  to-day,  was  most  violently  in- 
sisted, on  by  those  who  were  least  capable  of  forming  a 
judgment  about  it.  His  "  views  were  unsound,"  he  was 
"  tending  to  Popery,"  who  openly  expressed  his  doubts 
upon  the  question,  and  so  the  odium  theologicum,  as  so 
often  before  and  since,  muzzled  the  honest  seeking  for 
the  truth,  and  the  unbiassed  scholarly  study  of  the 
subject  was  thrown  back  for  centuries. 

Though  much  has  been  already  done  we  have  still 
great  need  of  a  good  critical  edition  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, embodying  the  chief  results  of  modern  scholar- 
ship. There  is,  of  course,  in  the  absence  of  all  manu- 
scripts of  earlier  than  Massoretic  times,  a  great  drawback 


112  NOTES  AND  JOTTINGS. 

to  the  critical  study  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  compared 
with  the  New.  But  much  more  might  be  done  with 
the  material  at  hand,  especially  with  the  ancient  ver- 
sions, which,  if  thoroughly  investigated,  are  capable  of 
throwing  much  light  upon  the  Hebrew  text.  There  is 
reason  to  hope  that  our  own  generation  will  not  be 
entirely  unfruitful  in  this  direction.  We  are  promised 
very  soon  Dr.  Ginsburg's  critical  edition  of  the  Masso- 
retic  text ;  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury  is  busy  with  the 
Vulgate  of  the  New  Testament,  which  we  trust  will 
soon  be  followed  by  that  of  the  Old.  Swete's  scholarly 
edition  of  the  Septuagint  is  in  course  of  completion, 
and  students  are  already  busying  themselves  with  the 
great  treasury  of  Syriac  manuscripts  stored  up  in  the 
library  of  the  British  Museum  and  elsewhere.  But 
many  years  must  elapse  before  any  important  results 
are  attained  in  the  investigation  of  the  Hebrew  Scrip- 
tures. The  recent  revision  of  the  Old  Testament  was 
undertaken  at  least  half-a- century  too  soon. 

As  to  the  right  attitude  to  adopt  with  regard  to  the 
present  Hebrew  text,  we  may  say  that  the  best  scholars 
receive  it  without  hesitation  as  substantially  accurate, 
at  the  same  time  leaving  themselves  open  to  accept 
any  really  well-authenticated  corrections  by  means  of 
the  ancient  versions. 

In  speaking  thus  plainly  about  the  probability  of 
errors  in  the  Scriptures,  there  is  great  danger  that 
an  exaggerated  impression  should  be  caused  as  to  the 


NOTES  AND  JOTTINGS.  113 

extent  of  these  errors.  The  reader  should  be  reminded 
that  the  great  majority  are  of  the  most  trivial  kind, 
misspelling  or  transposing  of  words,  omitting  or  in- 
serting of  insignificant  particles,  and  such  like.  The 
New  Testament  variations  are  enormously  more  in 
number  than  those  which  probably  will  ever  be  dis- 
covered in  the  Old,  and  yet  two  of  our  greatest  textual 
critics  have  asserted  in  a  recent  famous  book^  that  the 
New  Testament  variations  of  any  importance,  if  all  put 
together,  would  not  exceed  the  one-tliousandtli  part  of 
the  whole  text. 

Some  readers  will  perhaps  be  disturbed  at  finding 
that  the  Old  Testament  has  not  been  transmitted  to 
us  absolutely  word  for  word  correct.  Well,  such  is 
the  case  anyhow ;  and  whether  we  like  it  or  no,  there 
is  no  use  in  quarrelling  with  facts.  We  know  with 
certainty  that  we  have  the  suhstancc  of  God's  revelation 
exactly  as  the  original  writers  had  it ;  that  we  cannot 
say  the  same  of  every  letter  and  syllable  is  surely  not 
of  so  very  much  account.  And  perhaps  it  may  not  be 
altogether  an  unmixed  evil  either.  It  may  help  men 
to  broader  and  truer  notions  of  what  inspiration  really 
means.  It  may  teach  that  not  the  ignorant  worship 
of  the  letter,  but  the  honest  learning  and  obeying  of 
the  spirit  of  His  revelation  is  what  God  values,  since 
He  has  left  the  words  of  the  Bible  in  some  degree  to 
run  the  same  risks  as  the  words  of  other  books,  while 
taking  care  that  its  substance  should  come  down  to  us 

^  Westcott  and  Hort's  Introduction  to  the  Greek  New  Testament. 

H 


114  NOTES  AND  JOTTINGS. 

as  originally  given.  It  is  surely  instructive  to  see  our 
Lord  and  His  apostles  content  to  use  a  Bible  (the 
Septuagint)  wliicli,  while  giving  faithfully  the  sub- 
stance of  God's  Word,  was  often  very  inaccurate  in 
minor  details.  We  have  a  much  more  accurate  Bible 
than  they.  But  whatever  our  feeling  about  the  matter, 
we  should  remember  that  we  have  it  as  God  has  thought 
fit  to  let  us  have  it.  Had  it  been  necessary  to  His  pur- 
poses that  the  text  should  have  been  miraculously 
preserved  from  the  slightest  flaw,  we  need  have  no 
doubt  but  that  this  would  have  been  accomplished. 


Boom  M. 


THE    OTHER    OLD    DOCUMENTS, 


AND   THEIR   USE   IN 


BIBLICAL    ORITICISM. 


INTRODUCTION. 

Having  now  learned  something  of  the  history  and 
present  condition  of  the  "  Old  Hebrew  Documents," 
we  have  next  to  examine  some  of  the  "  Other  Old 
Documents,"  i.e.,  the  various  ancient  Bibles  which  are 
used  by  critics  in  the  investigation  of  the  Hebrew  text. 

The  reader  will  easily  understand  from  the  previous 
history  the  importance  of  these  Bibles.  All  the  old 
Hebrew  manuscripts  before  a.d.  900  have  vanished 
from  the  earth ;  unless  in  the  very  improbable  event 
of  some  future  romantic  discovery  in  tombs  or  buried 
cities,  we  shall  never  be  able  to  examine  one  of  them. 
But  these  ancient  Bibles  were  translated  from  those  old 
vanished  manuscripts  ages  and  ages  ago.  Therefore 
the  interrogating  of  them  is  like  going  back  a  thousand 
years  behind  our  existing  manuscripts  and  asking  the 
men  of  our  Lord's  day,  and  even  of  long  before,  "  How 
did  that  vanished  old  Hebrew  Bible  of  yours  read  this 
or  that  disputed  passage  ?  " 

Unfortunately,  the  value  of  their  evidence  also  is 
lessened,  as  might  be  expected,  by  the  same  slips  and 
errors  of  copyists  whose  existence  in  the  Hebrew 
Bible  has  sent  us  to  seek  their  aid.  In  the  following 
pages  we  shall  deal  with  the  more  important  of  these 
ancient  Bibles. 


DOCUMENT  No.  I. 

THE  PENTATEUCH  OF  THE  SAMARITANS. 

I. 
The  Holy  Manuscript  of  Nablous. 

It  Lad  often  been  noticed  with  some  curiosity, 
especially  at  the  Reformation  times,  in  tlie  disputes 
about  the  Hebrew  Bible,  that  in  the  works  of  certain 
old  fathers,  Origen,  and  St.  Jerome,  and  Eusebius  the 
historian,  and  others,  there  were  references  to  "  the 
ancient  Eclreiu  according  to  the  Samaritans,''  as  dis- 
tinguished from  the  "  Hebrew  according  to  the  Jews," 
and  notes  made  of  certain  discrepancies  existing  be- 
tween them.  What  could  these  references  mean  ? 
No  one  in  Europe  knew  anything  about  a  "  Samaritan 
Hebrew."  Was  it  merely  an  error  of  these  ancient 
fathers,  or  did  there  somewhere  exist  a  Hebrew  Bible 
differing  from  that  which  had  come  down  to  us  through 
the  Jews  ? 

As  time  went  on  and  nothing  was  discovered  about 
it,  it  gradually  began  to  be  forgotten  or  relegated  to 
the  region  of  ancient  fiction ;  until  one  day,  early  in 
the  seventeenth  century,  when  Biblical  students  were 
startled   by  the   announcement    that   a   copy   of    this 


THE  PENTATEUCH  OF  THE  SAMARITANS.      119 

mysterious  document  had  arrived  in  Europe,  having 
been  discovered  by  a  traveller  among  the  Samaritans 
of  Damascus. 

It  was  a  very  venerable-looking  manuscript,  written 
in  the  unfamiliar  ancient  Hebrew  letters,  and  for  that 
reason  at  first  very  difficult  to  read. 

Soon  afterwards  another  copy  was  found  in  Egypt, 
but  was  captured  by  pirates,  with  the  ship  that  was 
bringing  it  to  Europe.  Before  1630  Archbishop 
Ussher  had  obtained  six  others,  and  now  there  are 
altogether  about  sixteen  Samaritan  manuscripts  in 
the  European  libraries. 

The  most  famous  copy  in  existence  is  the  Synagogue 
Roll  at  Nablous,  where  the  Samaritans,  now  but  a  few 
hundred  in  number,  still  cling  to  the  ancient  seat  of 
their  race.^  It  is  guarded  with  the  most  sacred  care, 
and  never  exhibited  even  to  their  own  people,  except 
on  the  Great  Day  of  Atonement.  A  few  Europeans 
have,  however,  managed  to  get  a  sight  of  it,  and  from 
their  accounts  we  learn  that  the  writing,  which  seems 
very  old,  is  on  the  hair-side  of  skins  twenty-five  inches 
by  fifteen — according  to  the  Samaritan  account,  the 
skins  of  rams  ofiered  in  sacrifice.  The  manuscript  is 
worn  very  thin,  even  into  holes  in  many  places,  and  it 
is  a  good  deal  messed,  as  if  with  ink  spilled  over  it,  so 
that  a  large  part  is  almost  illegible.  It  is  kept  in  a 
cylindrical  silver  case,  ornamented  with  engravings  of 
the   Tabernacle  and   its   furniture,   and   the  whole  is 

^  Nablous,  a  corruption  of  Neapolis,  is  almost  on  the  site  of  ancient 
Sliechem. 


I20     THE  PENTATEUCH  OF  THE  SAMARITANS. 

wrapped  in  a  gorgeously  embroidered  cover  of  red 
satin  and  gold.  The  Samaritans  assert  that  it  is 
nearly  as  old  as  the  days  of  Moses.  They  say — and 
one  Eussian  traveller  asserts  that  they  are  right — that 
an  inscription  runs  through  the  middle  of  the  text  of 
the  Ten  Commandments  : — 

I  Abishua,  son  of  Phinehas,  son  of  Eleazak  son 
OF  Aaron  the  priest — upon  them  be  the  grace 
of  Jehovah  !    To  His  honour  have  I  written 
THIS  HOLY  Law  at  the  entrance  of  the  Tabernacle 
OP  Testimony  on  Mount  Gerizim,  Beth  El,  in 

THE  thirteenth  YEAR  OF  THE  TAKING  POSSESSION  OF 

the  land  of  Canaan.    Praise  Jehovah  ! 

The  inscription,  however,  has  been  looked  for  since, 
but  in  vain.  Without  entering  too  minutely  into 
the  question,  all  that  we  need  say  here  is,  that  if  it 
is  or  ever  was  in  the  manuscript,  it  does  not  deserve 
the  slightest  credit.  Nobody  who  knows  anything  of 
the  subject  would  believe  that  this  manuscript  has 
been  in  existence  three  thousand  years. 


II. 
"Decline  and  Fall"  of  the  Samaritan  Bible. 

Of  course,  these  very  ancient-looking  manuscripts, 
when  they  first  appeared,  created  a  considerable  sen- 
sation. Men  talked  of  their  use  among  scholars  of 
Origen's  days,  of  their  strange  ancient  writing  dating 
back  beyond  Ezra  the  Scribe,  and  with  the  usual 
tendency  of  human  nature  under  such  circumstances, 
many  jumped  at  once  to  the  conclusion  that  they  had 


THE   SAMARITAN   ROLL   AT   NABLOUS. 
{By  kind  permission  of  the  Palestine  Exploration  Fund.) 


To  face  page  120.] 


THE  PENTATEUCH  OF  THE  SAMARITANS.     121 

got  back  to  a  document  of  vast  antiquity,  and  that  tlio 
received  Hebrew  text  was  of  little  account  beside  it. 

Of  course,  too,  like  the  other  Biblical  disputes 
referred  to  already,  indeed  like  most  theological  dis- 
putes of  those  days  when  party  spirit  ran  so  high,  the 
question  as  to  their  value  soon  became  a  contest  for 
victory  of  party.  The  Eomanist  theologians  made  it 
almost  a  point  of  honour  to  uphold  the  Samaritan 
Scriptures.  In  the  first  place,  they  had  always  a 
strong  prejudice  against  the  Hebrew  Bible.  Not  one 
of  the  good  fathers  of  the  Council  of  Trent  knew  a 
word  of  Hebrew,  and  they  did  not  like  its  being  set 
up  as  an  authority  against  their  Latin  Vulgate  Bible, 
the  '^  Authorised  Version "  of  the  Western  Church. 
Besides,  it  scored  a  point  for  them  against  Protestants 
if  they  could  show  that  there  was  any  uncertainty  as 
to  the  text  of  the  received  Bible  on  which  Protestants 
professed  to  take  their  stand — it  proved  the  need  of 
an  infallible  guide,  which  of  course  existed  only  in 
the  Church  of  Rome.  The  Protestants  were  not  slow 
in  following  the  controversial  lead  thus  set  them, 
and  so,  instead  of  critically  examining  the  Samaritan 
credentials  with  patient  scholarly  care,  both  parties 
contented  themselves  with  fighting  for  victory  and 
vigorously  abusing  their  opponents. 

This  is  no  place  for  a  critical  treatment  of  the 
question.  Sufiice  it  to  say,  that  when  the  din  of 
controversy  had  ceased  sufiiciently  for  calmer  argu- 
ments to  be  heard,  the  opinion  of  scholars  gradually 
grew  against   the   authority   of   the    Samaritan   text, 


122      THE  PENTATEUCH  OF  THE  SAMARITANS. 

though  still  they  were  willing  to  allow  a  good  deal 
of  weight  to  its  variations  from  the  Hebrew.  At 
length,  early  in  the  present  century,  even  the  remnant 
of  authority  remaining  to  it  was  quite  swept  away. 
A  great  Hebrew  scholar,  Gesenius,  having  analysed 
and  classified  its  deviations  from  the  Jewish  manu- 
scripts, showed  in  a  masterly  essay  that  they  were 
nearly  all  owing  to — (i)  grammatical  blunders  of 
the  Samaritan  Scribes ;  or  (2)  to  a  disposition  to 
smooth  and  explain  readings  that  seemed  to  them 
difficult  and  obscure ;  or  (3)  to  a  wilful  corruption  of 
the  text  for  controversial  purposes,  as,  for  example, 
where  they  substitute  for  the  name  of  Ebal  that  of 
Mount  Gerizim,  on  which  their  schismatical  Temple 
stood,  to  show  that  this  was  the  spot  indicated  by  God 
as  the  future  national  place  of  worship.  We  may  add 
that,  so  unanswerable  are  the  arguments  in  this  treatise, 
no  one  now  would  think  of  setting  up  the  Samaritan 
Pentateuch  as  an  authority  in  Biblical  criticism. 

III. 
Its  Use  in  Criticism. 

Yet  is  it  of  some  value  in  criticising  our  Hebrew 
Bible.  With  all  its  faults,  it  has  at  least  this  in  its 
favour  as  an  independent  witness,  that  its  text  has 
been  kept  for  nearly  twenty-five  centuries  free  from 
any  contact  with  the  received  Jewish  text.  Therefore, 
its  substantial  agreement  through  its  whole  extent 
with  the  Massoretic  manuscripts  is  a  clear  proof  of 
their  general  accuracy.      On  the  other  hand,   if,    in 


12: 

some  minor  detail,  the  Syriac  and  Vulgate  and  other 
important  ancient  Bibles  to  be  described  hereafter 
agree  with  each  other  against  a  reading  in  the  Jewish 
Bible,  it  is  evident  that  their  case  would  be  con- 
siderably strengthened  if  we  found  the  Samaritan  on 
their  side,  as  in  the  examples  already  given  (p.  52), 
"Cain  said  unto  Abel,  Let  us  go  into  the  field" 
(Gen.  iv.  8),  or  Joseph  "made  bondmen"  of  the 
people  of  Egypt  (Gen.  xlvii.  21).  Here  the  Septua- 
gint  and  Syriac  and  Vulgate  agree  against  the  Hebrew  ; 
and  when  we  turn  to  the  Samaritan  we  find  it  agree- 
ing with  them,  thus  making  a  strong  case  against  the 
accuracy  of  the  received  text  in  these  places. 

There  is  a  well-known  variation  in  Exod.  xii.  40, 
where  the  Hebrew  text  tells  that  "the  sojourning  of 
the  children  of  Israel  who  dwelt  in  Egypt  was  430 
years."  If  the  writer  meant  that  their  sojourning  iri 
Ujypt  was  430  years,  it  seems  dijGficult  to  reconcile  it 
with  the  chronology  or  with  St.  Paul's  statement  in 
Gal.  iii.  17,  where  430  years  is  given  as  the  whole 
interval  between  Abraham  and  the  Lawgiving  on 
Mount  Sinai.  The  Samaritan  has,  "  The  sojourning 
of  the  children  of  Israel  and  of  their  fathers  in  the 
land  of  Canaan  and  in  the  land  of  Egypt  was  430 
years."  ^  It  may  be  that  the  Samaritan  is  right,  but 
from  what  we  know  of  its  general  character,  it  is  not 
at  all  improbable  that  this  is  a  correction  to  remove 
what  seemed  to  its  editors  a  chronological  difficulty. 

1  And  the  Septuagint  has  substantially  the  same.  Yet  there  are 
forcible  arguments  on  the  other  side,  and  Egyptologists  say  that  the 
Egyptian  chronology  seems  to  confirm  our  received  reading. 


124      THE  PENTATEUCH  OF  THE  SAMARITANS, 

The  reading  seems  a  very  tempting  one,  but  moot 
Biblical  critics  refuse  to  accept  it.  It  is  a  good 
illustration  of  the  rule  in  p.  25,  that  in  many  cases 
"the  more  difficult  of  two  readings  must  be  preferred 
to  the  easier." 


A  Roundabout  Story-teller. 

The  reader  must  not  think  that  because  the  Sama- 
ritan is  of  little  authority  in  its  variations  from  the 
Jewish  Pentateuch,  it  is  therefore  a  very  corrupt  and 
valueless  book.  Nothing  of  the  kind.  If  we  had  not 
the  Jewish  text  we  should  not  be  at  all  badly  off  with 
the  "  Five  Books  of  Moses,  according  to  the  Samaritans." 
The  variations  for  the  most  part  consist  of  unimportant 
mistakes  of  grammar,  and  of  expansions  and  para- 
phrases which  very  little  affect  the  meaning.  One 
curious  peculiarity  is,  that  when  there  is  recorded  some 
long  command  of  God  to  Moses,  whereas  the  Jewish  text 
would  briefly  tell  that  Moses  did  as  he  was  commanded, 
the  Samaritan  must  needs  go  over  the  whole  command, 
word  for  word,  in  recording  that  Moses  had  done  it. 

It  may  interest  the  reader  to  have  a  specimen  from 
this  famous  old  document.  I  select  the  following 
passage  because  it  illustrates,  amongst  other  things, 
the  peculiarity  I  have  just  referred  to.  It  will  be 
noticed  that  it  agrees  substantially  with  the  Hebrew, 
its  only  variation  being  that  it  repeats  almost  word  for 
word  the  second  paragraph  in  recording  how  literally 
Moses  and  Aaron  did  as  they  were  commanded : — 


HEBREW. 

And  the  Loed  said  unto 
Moses,  Pharaoh's  heart  is  har- 
dened, HE  EEFUSETH  to  LET  THE 

PEOPLE  GO.    Get  thee  unto  Pha- 

BAOH  IN  THE  MORNING  ;  LO,  HE 
GOETH  unto  the  water  ;  AND 
THOU  SHALT  STAND  BY  THE  RIVER's 
BRINK  AGAINST  HE  COME  ;  AND  THE 
ROD  WHICH  WAS  TURNED  TO  A  SER- 
PENT SHALT  THOU  TAKE  IN  THINE 
HAND. 

And  THOU  shalt  say  unto 
HIM,  The  Lord  God  of  the 
Hebrews  hath  sent  me  unto 
thee,  saying.  Let  my  people 
GO,  that  they  may  serve  me  in 

THE  WILDERNESS  :  AND,  BEHOLD, 
HITHERTO     THOU     WOULDEST     NOT 

HEAR.  Thus  saith  the  Lord, 
In  this  thou  shalt  know  that 
I  am  the  Lord  :  behold,  I  will 

SMITE  with  the  ROD  THAT  IS  IN 
mine  HAND  UPON  THE  WATERS 
WHICH  ARE  IN  THE  RIVER,  AND 
THEY      SHALL      BE      TURNED     INTO 

BLOOD.  And  the  fish  that  is  in 
the  river  shall  die,  and  the 
river  shall  stink  ;  and  the 
Egyptians     shall     loathe    to 

DRINK  of  the  water  OF  THE 
RIVER. 


And  the  Lord   spake   unto 
Moses,  Say  unto  Aaron,  Take 

THY  rod,  and  stretch  OUT  THINE 
HAND  UPON  THE  WATERS  OF  EgYPT, 

&c.— Exod.  vii.  14-19. 


SAMARITAN. 

And  the  Lord  said  unto 
Moses,  Pharaoh's  heart  is  har- 
dened, HE  REFUSETH  to  LET  THE 

people  go.  Get  thee  unto  Pha- 
raoh IN  THE  MORNING  ;  LO,  HE 
GOETH  UNTO  THE  WATER  ;  AND 
THOU  SHALT  STAND  BY  THE  RIVER's 
BRINK  AGAINST  HE  COME  ;  AND  THE 
ROD  WHICH  WAS  TURNED  TO  A  SER- 
PENT SHALT  THOU  TAKE  IN  THINE 
HAND. 

And  THOU  shalt  say  unto 
HIM,  The  Lord  God  of  the 
Hebrews   hath   sent   me    unto 

THEE,  SAYING,  LeT  MY  PEOPLE 
GO,  THAT  THEY  MAY  SERVE  ME  IN 
THE  WILDERNESS  :  AND,  BEHOLD, 
HITHERTO     THOU     WOULDEST     NOT 

HEAR.  Thus  saith  the  Lord, 
In  this  thou  shalt  know  that 
I  AM  THE  Lord  :  behold,  I  will 

SMITE  WITH  THE  ROD  THAT  IS  IN 
MINE  HAND  UPON  THE  WATERS 
WHICH  ARE  IN  THE  RIVER,  AND 
THEY     SHALL      BE      TURNED      INTO 

BLOOD.  And  the  fish  that  is  in 
the  river  shall  die,  and  the 
river  shall  stink  ;  and  the 
Egyptians  shall  loathe  to  drink 
of  the  water  of  the  river, 

And  Moses  and  Aaron  went 
TO  Pharaoh,  and  said  unto  him, 
The  Lord  God  of  the  Hebrews 
hath  sent  us  to  thee,  saying, 
Let  my  people  go,  that  they 
may  serve  me  in  the  wilder- 
ness :    and,    behold,    hitherto 

THOU  WOULDEST  NOT  HEAR.   ThUS 

SAITH  THE  Lord,  In  this  thou 

SHALT  KNOW  THAT  I  AM  THE  LoRD  : 
BEHOLD,  I  WILL  SMITE  WITH  THE 
ROD  THAT  IS  IN  MINE  HAND  UPON 
THE  WATERS  WHICH  ARE  IN  THE 
RIVER,  AND  THEY  SHALL  BE  TURNED 
INTO  BLOOD.  And  THE  FISH  THAT  IS 
IN  THE  RIVER  SHALL  DIE,  AND  THE 
RIVER     SHALL     STINK  ;     AND     THE 

Egyptians  SHALL  loathe  to  drink 

OF  THE  WATER  OF  THE  RIVER. 

And  THE  Lord  spake  unto 
Moses,  Say  unto  Aaron,  Take 

THY  ROD,  and  STRETCH  OUT  THINE 

hand  upon  the  waters  op 
Egypt,  &c. 


DOCUMENTS  No.  II. 

THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS. 

Here  we  bring  together  a  group  of  documents  not  of 
sufficient  importance  to  be  separately  treated. 

THE  TALMUD. 

I. 
What  is  the  Talmud? 

We  have  already  seen  (Bk.  i.  p.  79)  that  from  time 
immemorial  there  existed  amongst  the  Jews  certain 
oral  traditions  about  the  Scriptures  and  their  inter- 
pretation; that  these,  handed  down  through  many 
generations,  were  at  length,  in  the  early  centuries  of 
Christianity,  collected  and  systematised  in  the  colleges 
of  the  Scribes  into  a  book  called  the  Mishna  ;  that  in 
course  of  time  a  "Gemara,"  or  Commentary,  was  written 
on  this  book ;  and  that  the  Mishna,  together  with  its 
Gemara,  make  up  what  is  called  the  Talmud.  We 
may  add  here  that  the  writing  down  of  the  Mishna 
occurred  about  the  second  century  a.d.,  and  that  of  the 
Gemara  about  the  fourth  or  fifth.^     It  is  evident  that 

1  The  Gemara,  or  Commentary  of  Jerusalem,  dates  about  370  A.D., 
and  that  of  the  Babylon  schools  about  500  a.d.  According  as  the 
Jerusalem  or  Babylon  Gemara  was  attached  to  the  Mishna,  so  the 
whole  was  called  the  Jerusalem  "or  Babylon  Talmud. 


THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS.  127 

such  a  book  as  this  must  necessarily  contain  a  great 
many  quotations  from  Scripture,  often  involving  minute 
reference  to  the  exact  words  of  the  text,  and  therefore 
that  it  ought  to  be  one  of  the  most  valuable  aids  in 
testing  the  accuracy  of  the  existing  manuscripts. 

Unfortunately,  however,  owing  to  the  extreme  re- 
verence of  the  Jews  for  the  Massoretic  text,  the  succes- 
sive editors  of  the  Talmud  seem  to  have  altered  its 
quotations  to  correspond  with  the  Hebrew  manuscripts 
before  them,  so  that  the  most  careful  examination  of 
the  existing  Talmud  copies  have  led  to  no  discoveries 
of  much  importance.  True,  there  are  recorded  about 
a  thousand  variations  from  the  existing  Bible,  but 
very  few  of  them  are  of  any  consequence.  Therefore, 
it  will  be  seen  that  the  Talmud  cannot  be  expected  to 
count  for  much  in  the  aids  to  Bible  criticism. 

This  is  all  that  is  absolutely  necessary  to  be  said  about 
the  Talmud  for  the  purpose  of  this  present  work,  but 
it  is  impossible  here  to  lay  down  the  pen.  Indeed,  it 
would  be  scarcely  justifiable  to  dismiss  in  a  few  pages 
a  book  that  stands  out  so  prominently  in  the  history 
of  Judaism — nay,  I  should  rather  say  in  the  history 
of  the  world.  Who  has  not  heard  of  the  "  Talmud," 
and  formed  some  puzzled  notion  as  to  what  the  word 
means  ?  Continually  it  meets  us  in  all  classes  of 
reading.  In  science,  in  literature,  in  theology,  in 
law,  in  ethics,  in  metaphysics,  in  ancient  fairy-lore, 
the  old-world  name  arises  to  us  again  and  again, 
making  us  wonder  what  the  curious  treatise  can  be 
that  touches  in  so  many  points  such  varied  subjects. 


128.  THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS. 

It  is,  therefore,  worth  while  writing  a  little  further 
about  the  Talmud.  One  is  sorely  tempted  to  wander 
off  into  whole  chapters  on  its  fascinating  lore.  So 
if  we  promise  to  reasonably  restrain  our  vagrant  im- 
pulses, the  reader,  we  hope,  will  pardon  a  few  pages 
more,  even  if  not  absolutely  necessary  to  our  "  Lesson 
in  Biblical  Criticism." 

n. 
Conflicting  Opinions. 

Very  varied  are  the  opinions  about  the  Talmud. 
Christian  writers,  with  whom  it  has  been  too  much  the 
custom  to  read  non-Christian  books  with  the  object  of 
refuting  them,  have  given  us  many  treatises  branding 
it  as  the  very  curse  of  Judaism  and  of  religion.  They 
have  dwelt  upon  our  Lord's  condemning  its  traditions. 
They  have  collected  from  it  samples  torn  out  of  their 
context,  silly  and  grotesque  stories,  conflicting  state- 
ments, and  specimens  of  the  ignorant  and  narrow  pre- 
judices of  the  nation.  They  have  declaimed  against  its 
legendary  colouring  of  Bible  narratives — its  profane 
and  degrading  representations  of  God,  the  Almighty 
and  His  angels  taking  part  in  foolish  discussions  of 
the  Kabbis.  They  have  held  up  their  hands  in  horror 
at  indelicate  allusions  such  as  they  could  not  dare  to 
transfer  to  their  pages. 

And  all  these  charges  can  be  fully  proved  against 
the  Talmud.  In  its  vast  and  tangled  mass  of  ancient 
lore  many  such  evil  things  as  these  can  be  found. 
Indeed,  at  times,  the  reader,  wandering  through  the 


THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS.  129 

pages  of  nonsense  that  these  wise  sages  wrote,  will 
feel  almost  a  sympathy  with  the  belief  of  Carlyle,  that 
"  nine  out  of  every  ten  men  are  fools,  and  he  would  not 
like  to  say  too  much  about  the  tenth."  But  to  dwell 
only  on  these  faults  would  be  to  give  a  very  false  impres- 
sion of  this  wonderful  old  book,  some  parts  of  which  have 
come  down  to  us  from  almost  the  dawn  of  antiquity. 

It  should  be  remembered  that  our  Lord  Himself, 
like  all  other  Jewish  boys,  was  probably,  in  His 
childhood,  taught  from  the  Talmud ;  that  many  of  our 
household  words  in  theology  have  come  to  us,  through 
Him,  from  the  Talmud  teaching.  Redemption,  Bap- 
tism, Grace,  Salvation,  Faith,  Son  of  Man,  &c.,  are 
words  of  old  Judaism,  to  which  He  only  gave  a  higher 
meaning.  His  rebukes,  too,  were  directed  only  against 
its  faults,  not  against  its  whole  substance.  The  Talmud 
itself  speaks  almost  as  strongly  as  He  against  the 
"  plague  of  Pharisaism  j"  the  ''  dyed  ones  who  do  evil 
deeds  like  Zimri,  and  require  a  goodly  reward  like 
Phinehas  ; "  "  who  preach  beautifully,  but  do  not  act 
beautifully."  The  Talmud  jooints  to  the  Scriptures  as 
the  source  of  all  teaching.  "  Turn  them,  and  turn 
them  again,"  it  says,  for  "  everything  is  in  them."  Six 
hundred  and  thirteen  injunctions,  says  the  Talmud, 
was  Moses  directed  to  give  to  the  people.  David 
reduced  them  to  eleven  in  the  15  th  Psalm  :  "  He  that 
walketh  uprightly,"  &c.  The  prophet  Micah  reduced 
them  to  three :  "  What  doth  the  Lord  require  of 
thee,  but  to  do  justly,  and  to  love  mercy,  and  to 
walk     humbly     with     thy     God  ? "    (vi.     8).       Amoa 


I30  THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS. 

reduced   them   to   one :    '*'  Seek   ye  Me  and  ye  shall 
live  "  (v.  4). 

Therefore  it  is  that  the  Jews  indignantly  chal- 
lenge the  Christian  accounts  of  this  their  greatest 
literary  treasure  next  to  the  Bible.  They  point  to 
its  enforcing  and  explaining  the  Scriptures ;  to  its 
mighty  influence  in  preserving  their  nationality;  to 
its  wholesome  directions  about  purity  and  cleanli- 
ness ;  to  its  result  in  many  a  social  excellence  in  the 
character  of  their  nation.  "  Nothing,"  say  they,  "  can 
absolve  the  Jews  from  the  debt  of  gratitude  which 
they  owe  to  the  Talmud,  the  book  which  in  so  great 
measure  has  helped  to  make  them  what  they  are." 


III. 
"  Law  and   Legend." 

To  understand  these  conflicting  testimonies,  it  is 
important  to  keep  in  mind,  what  has  been  too  often 
overlooked,  that  the  Talmud  consists  of  two  elements, 
Law  and  Legend,  Halachah  and  Hagadah,  as  they  are 
called  by  the  Jews. 

The  former  is  an  attempt  to  bring  the  Mosaic 
legislation  into  practical  operation — that  is,  to  bring 
under  its  great  principles  the  little  ordinary  cases  of 
everyday  life.  This  is  often  done  in  a  foolish  and 
quibbling  manner ;  it  often  goes  into  indelicate  de- 
tails in  order  to  be  thoroughly  practical ;  it  often,  too, 
must  be  charged  with  making  void  the  Word  of  God 


THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS.  131 

by  its  refinements  of  fanciful  exposition.  Yet  no  man 
who  studies  the  history  of  the  Jews  can  doubt,  on  the 
whole,  its  important  influence  for  good  upon  the  nation. 
The  other  or  Legendary  element  consists  of  a  series 
of  anecdotes  and  sayings  of  the  scribes,  a  kind  of 
ornamental  addition  illustrating  and  enforcing  the 
principles  of  the  Law,  or  affectionately  commemorating 
the  great  sages  of  the  past.  To  us  stolid  children  of 
the  West  it  must  seem  often  but  a  wild  play  of  fancy 
and  fable  and  humour  not  very  much  in  keeping  with 
the  solemnity  of  its  purpose ;  but  to  the  Jews,  who 
know  it  best,  it  is  a  store  of  wise  and  tender  and 
touching  sayings ;  its  allegories  and  parables  and 
fairy-lore,  even  where  they  seem  to  us  the  most 
foolish,  being  credited  with  a  lofty  and  beautiful  secret 
meaning.  And  even  our  duller  vision  can  perceive 
that  many  of  its  stories  and  moral  precepts  are  exqui- 
sitely beautiful,  and  cannot  fail  to  be  helpful  to  the 
Jewish  children,  who  are  taught  them  from  their 
earliest  days. 

IV. 

Talmud  Sayings. 

In  the  following  section  I  give  some  specimens 
from  the  Talmud.  But  it  is  necessary  to  guard  the 
reader  against  forming  from  them  too  favourable  an 
impression.  He  must  remember  that  they  are  speci- 
mens of  the  Talmud  at  its  hest,  and  that  often  a  con- 
siderable mass  of  rubbish  has  to  be  waded  through 
to  find  them  : — ■ 


13^  THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS. 

Jerusalem  was  destroyed  because  the  instruction  of  the  young 
■was  neglected. 

The  world  is  saved  by  the  breath  of  the  school-children.  Even 
for  the  rebuilding  of  the  Temple,  schools  must  not  be  interrupted. 

A  sage,  walking  in  the  crowded  market-place,  suddenly  en- 
countered the  prophet  Elijah.  "Who  out  of  that  crowd  shall  be 
saved?"  he  asked ;  and  Elijah  pointed  to  a  poor  turnkey,  "  Because 
he  was  merciful  to  his  prisoners ; "  and  next  to  two  common 
workmen  pleasantly  talking  as  they  passed.  The  sage  rushed  up 
to  them  and  asked,  "I  pray  you,  what  are  your  saving  works'?" 
But  the  puzzled  workmen  replied,  "We  are  poor  men  who  live 
by  our  trade.  We  know  not  of  any  good  works  in  us.  We  try 
to  be  cheerful  and  good-natured.  We  talk  to  the  sad,  and  cheer 
them  to  forget  their  grief.  If  we  know  of  two  who  have  quarrelled, 
we  talk  to  them,  and  persuade  them  to  be  friends.  This  is  our 
whole  life," 

Life  is  a  passing  shadow,  says  the  Scripture.  Is  it  the  shadow 
of  a  tower  or  of  a  tree  ?  A  shadow  that  prevails  for  a  while  1 
Nay,  it  is  the  shadow  of  a  bird  in  his  flight ;  away  flies  the  bird, 
and  there  is  neither  bird  nor  shadow. 

He  who  has  more  learning  than  good  works  is  like  a  tree  with 
many  branches  but  few  roots,  which  the  first  wind  throws  on  its 
face  ;  while  he  whose  good  works  are  greater  than  his  knowledge 
is  like  a  tree  with  many  roots  and  few  branches,  which  all  the 
winds  of  heaven  cannot  uproot. 

Teach  thy  tongue  to  say,  "  I  do  not  know." 

Prayer  is  Israel's  only  weapon,  a  weapon  inherited  from  its 
fathers  and  tried  in  a  thousand  battles. 

Moses  made  a  serpent  of  brass  and  put  it  on  a  pole  ;  and  it 
came  to  pass,  if  a  serpent  had  bitten  any  man,  when  he  beheld 
that  serpent  of  brass  he  lived.     Dost  think  that  a  serpent  killeth 


THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS.  133 

or  giveth  life  ?    But  as  long  as  Israel  are  looking  up  to  their 
Father  in  Heaven  they  will  not  die. 

•  ••••••• 

We  read  that  while,  in  the  contest  with  Amalek,  Moses  lifted 
up  his  arms  Israel  prevailed.  Did  Moses'  hands  make  war  or 
break  war  ?  But  this  is  to  tell  you  that  as  long  as  Israel  are 
looking  upwards  and  humbling  their  hearts  before  the  Father  in 
Heaven  they  will  prevail ;  if  not,  they  fall. 


"  If  your  God  hates  idolatry,"  asked  a  heathen,  "  why  does  He 
not  destroy  it  ? "  And  they  answered  him,  "  Behold,  men  worship 
the  sun,  the  moon,  the  stars.  Would  you  have  Him  destroy  this 
beautiful  world  for  the  sake  of  the  foolish  ?  " 

If  there  is  anything  bad  to  say  of  you,  say  it  yourself. 

Commit  a  sin  twice  and  you  will  think  it  quite  allowable. 

Think  of  three  things,  whence  thou  comest,  whither  thou  goest, 
and  to  whom  thou  shalt  have  to  give  account,  even  the  All  Hol}^, 
praised  be  He  !  Four  shall  not  enter  into  Paradise  :  the  scoffer, 
the  liar,  the  hypocrite,  and  the  slanderer.  To  slander  is  to 
murder. 

Love  your  wife  like  yourself ;  honour  her  more  than  yourself. 
Whoever  lives  unmarried  lives  without  joy,  without  comfort, 
without  blessing.  Descend  a  step  in  choosing  a  wife.  If  she  be 
small,  bend  down  to  her  and  whisper  in  her  ear.  He  who  for- 
sakes the  love  of  his  youth,  God's  altar  weeps  for  him.  He  who 
sees  his  wife  die  before  him  has,  as  it  were,  been  present  at  the 
destruction  of  the  sanctuary  itself — the  world  grows  dark  around 
him. 

It  is  woman  alone  through  which  God's  blessings  are  vouch- 
safed to  a  house.  She  teaches  the  children,  speeds  the  •;  hus- 
band  to   the  place   of    worship,  and  welcomes  him  when  he 


134  THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS. 

returns  ;  she  kee^Ds  the  house  godly  and  pure,  and  God's  blessing 
rests  on  all  these  things. 


He  who  marries  for  money,  his  children  shall  be  a  curse  to  him. 

The  house  that  does  not  open  to  the  poor  shall  open  to  the 
physician. 

'  The  day  is  short  and  the  work  is  heavy,  but  the  labourers  are 
idle,  though  the  reward  be  great.  It  is  not  incumbent  on  thee  to 
complete  the  work,  but  thou  must  not  therefore  cease  from  it. 
If  thou  hast  worked  much  great  shall  be  thy  reward,  for  the 
Master  who  employed  thee  is  faithful  in  His  payment.  But 
know  that  the  true  reward  is  not  of  this  world. 

A  man  stands  at  the  door  of  his  patron's  house.  He  dare  not 
ask  for  the  patron  himself,  but  for  his  favourite  slave  or  his  son, 
who  then  goes  in  and  tells  the  master  inside,  "  This  man,  N.  N., 
is  standing  at  the  gate  ;  shall  he  come  in  or  not?"  Not  so  the 
Holy  ;  praised  be  He  !  If  misfortune  come  upon  a  man,  let  him 
not  cry  to  Michael  or  to  Gabriel,  but  unto  Me  let  him  cry,  and  I 
will  answer  him  right  speedily,  as  it  is  written,  Every  one  who 
calls  on  the  name  of  the  Lord  shall  be  saved. 


V. 
Bible  Commentary. 

Here  are  a  few  specimens  of  its  Bible  commentary  : — 

Cain  was  ploughing  his  fields.  Abel,  leading  his  flocks  to 
pasture,  crossed  the  ground  which  his  brother  was  tilling. 

In  a  wrathful  spirit,  Cain  approached  Abel,  saying,  "  Where- 
fore comest  thou  with  thy  flocks  to  dwell  in  and  to  feed  upon 
the  land  which  belongs  to  me  1 " 

And  Abel  answered,  "  Wherefore  eatest  thou  of  the  flesh  of  my 
sheep?  AVherefore  clothe  thyself  in  garments  fashioned  from 
their  wool  ?     Pay  me  for  the  flesh  which  thou  hast  eaten,  for  the 


THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS.  135 

garments  in  which  thou  art  clothed,  for  they  are  mine,  even  as 
this  ground  is  thine." 

Then  said  Cain  to  his  brother,  "  Behold,  thou  art  in  my  power. 
If  I  should  see  fit  to  slay  thee  now,  to-day,  who  would  avenge 
thy  death?" 

"  God,  who  has  placed  us  upon  this  earth,"  replied  Abel.  "  He 
is  the  judge  who  revvardeth  the  pious  man  according  to  his  deeds, 
and  the  wicked  according  to  his  wickedness.  Thou  canst  not  slay 
me  and  hide  from  Him  the  action.  He  will  surely  punish  thee; 
ay,  even  for  the  evil  words  which  thou  hast  spoken  to  me  but 
now." 

This  answer  increased  Cain's  wrathful  feelings,  and  raising  the 
implement  of  his  labour  which  he  was  holding  in  his  hand,  he 
struck  his  brother  suddenly  therewith  and  killed  him.  And  it 
came  to  pass  after  this  rash  action  that  Cain  grieved  and  wept 
bitterly.  Then  arising,  he  dug  a  hole  in  the  ground  and  buried 
therein  his  brother's  body  from  the  light  of  day. 

And  after  this,  the  Lord  appeared  to  Cain  and  said  to  him — 

"  Where  is  Abel  thy  brother,  who  was  with  thee  ? " 

And  Cain  replied  unto  the  Lord — 

"  I  know  not.    Am  I  my  brother's  keeper  ?  " 

Then  said  the  Lord — 

"  What  hast  thou  done  ?  Thy  brother's  blood  cries  to 
Me  from  the  ground." 

Abram,  when  quite  a  child,  beholding  the  brilliant  splendour 
of  the  noonday  sun  and  the  reflected  glory  which  it  cast  upon 
all  objects  around,  he  said,  *'  Surely  this  brilliant  light  must  be 
a  god  ;  to  him  will  I  render  worship."  And  he  worshipped  the 
sun  and  prayed  to  it.  But  as  the  day  lengthened  the  sun's  bright- 
ness faded,  the  radiance  which  it  cast  upon  the  earth  w^as  lost  in 
the  lowering  clouds  of  night,  and  as  the  twilight  deepened  the 
youth  ceased  his  supplication,  saying,  "  No,  this  cannot  be  a  god. 
Where  then  can  I  find  the  Creator,  He  who  made  the  heavens 
and  the  earth  ? "  He  looked  towards  the  west,  the  south,  the 
north,  and  to  the  east.  The  sun  disappeared  from  his  view  ; 
nature  became  enveloped  in  the  pall  of  a  past  day.  Then  the 
moon  arose,  and  wlien  Abram  saw  it  shining  in  the  heavens 


136  THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS. 

surrounded  by  its  myriads  of  stars,  he  said,  "Perhaps  these 
are  the  gods  who  have  created  all  things,"  and  he  uttered  prayers 
to  them.  But  when  the  morning  dawned  and  the  stars  paled, 
and  the  moon  faded  into  silvery  whiteness  and  was  lost  in  the 
returning  glory  of  the  suii,  Abram  knew  God,  and  said,  "  There 
is  a  higher  power,  a  Supreme  Being,  and  these  luminaries  are  but 
His  servants,  the  work  of  His  hands."  From  that  day,  even 
until  the  day  of  his  death,  Abram  knew  the  Lord,  and  walked  in 
all  His  ways.  And  Abram  sought  his  father  when  he  was  sur- 
rounded by  his  officers,  and  he  spoke  to  him,  saying — 

"Father  tell  me,  I  pray,  where  I  may  find  the  God  who 
created  the  heavens  and  the  earth,  thee,  and  me,  and  all  the 
people  in  the  world." 

And  Terah  answered,  "My  sou,  the  creator  of  all  things  is 
here  with  us  in  the  house." 

Then  said  Abram,  "  Show  him  to  me,  my  father." 

And  Terah  led  Abram  into  an  inner  apartment,  and  pointing 
to  the  twelve  large  idols  and  the  many  smaller  ones  around, 
he  said,  "  These  are  the  gods  who  created  the  heavens  and  the 
earth,  thee,  me,  and  all  the  people  of  the  world." 

Abram  then  sought  his  mother,  saying,  "  My  mother,  behold, 
my  father  has  shown  to  me  the  gods  who  created  the  earth  and 
all  that  it  contains  ;  therefore  prepare  for  me,  I  pray  thee,  a  kid 
for  a  sacrifice,  that  the  gods  of  my  father  may  partake  of  the 
same  and  receive  it  favourably." 

Abram's  mother  did  as  her  son  had  requested  her,  and  Abram 
placed  the  food  which  she  prepared  before  the  idols,  but  none 
stretched  forth  a  hand  to  eat. 

Then  Abram  jested,  and  said,  "Perchance  'tis  not  exactly  to 
their  tastes,  or  mayhap  the  quantity  appears  stinted.  I  will 
prepare  a  larger  offering,  and  strive  to  make  it  still  more 
savoury." 

Next  day  Abram  requested  his  mother  to  prepare  two  kids, 
and  with  her  greatest  skill,  and  placing  them  before  the  idols,  he 
watched,  with  the  same  result  as  on  the  previous  day. 

Then  Abram  exclaimed,  "  Woe  to  my  father  and  to  this  evil 
generation ;  woe  to  those  who  incline  their  hearts  to  vanity  and 
worship  senseless  images  without  the  power  to  smell  or  eat,  to 


THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS.  137 

see  or  hear.  Mouths  they  have,  but  sounds  they  cannot  utter ; 
eyes  they  have,  but  lack  all  power  to  see ;  they  have  ears  that 
cannot  hear,  hands  that  cannot  move,  and  feet  that  cannot  walk. 
Senseless  they  are  as  the  men  who  wrought  them  ;  senseless  all 
who  trust  in  them  and  bow  before  them."  And  seizing  an  iron 
implement,  he  destroyed  and  broke  with  it  all  the  images  save 
one,  into  the  hands  of  which  he  placed  the  iron  which  he  had 
used. 

The  noise  of  this  proceeding  reached  the  ears  of  Terah,  who 
hurried  to  the  apartment,  where  he  found  the  broken  idols  and 
the  food  which  Abram  had  placed  before  them.  In  wrath  and 
indignation  he  cried  out  unto  his  sou,  saying,  "  What  is  this  that 
thou  hast  done  unto  my  gods  1 " 

And  Abram  answered,  "I  brought  them  savoury  food,  and 
behold,  they  all  grasped  for  it  with  eagerness  at  the  same  time, 
all  save  the  largest  one,  who,  annoyed  and  displeased  with  their 
greed,  seized  that  iron  which  he  holds  and  destroyed  them." 

"  False  are  thy  words,"  answered  Terah  in  anger.  "  Had  these 
images  the  breath  of  life,  that  they  should  move  and  act  as  thou 
hast  said  1  Did  I  not  fashion  them  with  my  own  hands  1  How, 
then,  could  the  larger  destroy  the  smaller  ones  ? " 

"  Then  why  serve  senseless,  powerless  gods  ? "  replied  Abram  ; 
"  gods  who  can  neither  help  thee  in  thy  need  nor  hear  thy  sup- 
plications 1 " 

VI. 

The  Legend  of  Sandalphon. 

Some   of  onr   readers  will   remember   Longfellow's 
exquisite  presentation  of  the  ancient  Talmud  legend  : — 

SANDALPHON. 

"  Have  you  read  in  the  Talmud  of  old. 
In  the  legends  the  Rabbins  have  told. 
Of  the  limitless  realms  of  the  air, — 
Have  you  read  it, —  the  marvellous  story 
Of  Sandalphon,  the  Angel  of  Glory, 
Sandalphon,  the  Angel  of  Prayer? 


138  THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS. 

How  erect  at  the  outermost  gates 
Of  the  City  Celestial  he  waits, 

With  his  feet  on  the  ladder  of  light, 
Thatj  crowded  with  angels  unnumbered, 
By  Jacob  was  seen  as  he  slumbered 

Alone  in  the  desert  by  night  ? 

The  Angels  of  Wind  and  of  Fire 
Chant  only  one  hymn  and  expire 

With  the  song's  irresistible  stress  ; 
Expire  in  their  rapture  and  wonder, 
As  harp-strings  are  broken  asunder 

By  music  they  throb  to  express  ! 

But  serene  in  the  rapturous  throng, 
Unmoved  by  the  rush  of  the  song, 

With  eyes  unimpassioned  and  slow, 
Among  the  dead  angels,  the  deathless 
Sandalphon  stands  listening  breathless 

To  sounds  that  ascend  from  below  ; — 

From  the  spirits  on  earth  tliat  adore  ; 
From  the  souls  that  entreat  and  implore 

In  the  fervour  and  passion  of  prayer  ; 
From  the  hearts  that  are  broken  with  losses, 
And  weary  from  dragging  the  crosses 

Too  heavy  for  mortals  to  bear. 

And  he  gathers  the  prayers  as  he  stands, 
And  they  change  into  flowers  in  his  hands, 

Into  garlands  of  purple  and  red  ; 
And  beneath  the  great  arch  of  the  portal, 
Through  the  streets  of  the  City  Immortal, 

Is  wafted  the  fragrance  they  shed. 

It  is  but  a  legend,  I  know — 
A  fable,  a  phantom,  a  show 
Of  the  ancient  Kabbinical  lore  ; 


THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS.  139 

Yet  the  old  mediaeval  tradition, 
The  beautiful,  strange  superstition. 
But  haunts  me  and  holds  me  the  more. 

When  I  look  from  my  window  at  night, 
And  the  welkin  above  is  all  white, 

All  throbbing  and  panting  with  stars, 
Among  them  majestic  is  standing 
Sandalphon  the  angel,  expanding 

His  pinions  in  nebulous  bars. 

And  the  legend,  I  feel,  is  a  part 

Of  the  hunger  and  thirst  of  the  heart  ; 

The  frenzy  and  fire  of  the  brain, 
That  grasps  at  the  fruitage  forbidden, 
The  golden  pomegranates  of  Eden, 

To  quiet  its  fever  and  pain."  1 

VII. 

An  Ancient  "Rip  Van  Winkle." 

The  following  illustration  from  the  Babylonian 
Talmud  (Taanith,  fol.  23  a  and  h)  v?ill  show  (i)  how 
Bible  quotations  occur  which  may  be  used  for  textual 
criticism ;  (2)   the  Rabbis'  fanciful    method   of  Bible 

^  Longfellow  seems  to  have  been  a  good  deal  attracted  by  the  Talnaud. 
There  are  few  more  beautiful  things  in  his  works  than  the  Legend  of 
the  Rabbi  ben  Levi,  who  sprang  over  the  walls  of  Heaven  with  the 
sword  of  the  Angel  of  Death  in  his  hand,  and  thus  obtained  for  man 
the  boon  that  the  dread  Angel  must  "  walk  on  earth  unseen  for  ever- 
more." The  reader  may  remember  in  the  "  Golden  Legend  "  the  scene 
of  the  Rabbi  and  the  school-children  : — 

"  Come  hither,  Judas  Iscariot, 
Say  if  thy  lesson  thou  hast  got 
From  the  Rabbinical  Book  or  not  ? " 

and  how,  after  Judas  has  glibly  answered  in  the  great  Talmud  mys- 
teries, the  old  pedagogue  proceeds  to  call  up  "  little  Jesus,  the  car 
penter's  son." 


I40  THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS, 

interpretation;  and,  perhaps,  (3)  the  origin  of  the 
favourite  fairy-tale,  "  The  Sleeping  Beauty,"  who  slept 
for  seventy  years,  and  of  Washington  Irving's  famous 
story  of  "  Rip  Van  Winkle  :  " — 

"  Choni  ha-Maagol  was  all  his  life  unable  to  understand  the 
Biblical  possage,  '  When  the  Lord  turned  again  the  captivity 
of  Zion,  we  were  like  them  that  dream '  (Ps.  cxxvi.  i).  '  Can 
seventy  years  be  regarded  as  a  dream  ?  How  is  it  possible,'  he 
asked,  '  for  a  man  to  remain  for  seventy  years  asleep  ? '  One 
cla}^,  whilst  on  a  journey,  he  saw  a  man  planting  a  carob-tree,  and 
asked  him  how  long  a  period  he  expected  would  elapse  before 
the  tree  became  fruitful.  *  Seventy  years,'  was  the  reply.  '  Do 
you  then  expect  to  live  seventy  years  and  to  eat  of  the  fruit  ? ' 
'  When  I  entered  the  world,'  was  the  answer,  *  I  found  carob- 
trees  in  abundance.  Even  as  my  fathers  planted  for  me,  in  like 
manner  shall  I  also  plant  for  those  that  are  to  come  after  me.' 

"  Clioni  sat  down  to  his  meal,  and  a  deep  sleep  fell  upon  him, 
and  he  slumbered.  The  rock  closed  up  around  him,  and  he  was 
hidden  from  the  sight  of  men.  And  thus  he  lay  for  seventy 
years.  When  he  awoke  and  rose  to  his  feet,  lo !  he  beheld  a 
man  eating  of  the  fruit  of  the  very  carob-tree  that  he  had  seen 
planted.  Choni  asked,  '  Dost  thou  know  who  it  was  that  planted 
this  tree  1 '  '  My  grandfather.'  Then  Choni  knew  that  he  had 
slept  on  for  seventy  years.  He  went  to  his  house  and  asked 
where  the  son  of  Choni  ha-Maagol  was.  *  His  son,'  they  told 
him,  '  is  dead.  His  grandson  you  can  see  if  you  will.'  *  I  am 
Choni  ha-Maagol!'  he  exclaimed;  but  no  one  believed  him. 

"  He  thence  turned  his  steps  to  the  House  of  Learning,  and 
he  heard  the  Eabbis  saying,  *  We  have  resolved  this  difficulty 
as  we  used  to  do  when  Choni  ha-Maagol  was  alive  ; '  for  in 
times  past,  when  Choni  went  to  the  meeting,  he  was  able  to 
expound  every  subject  under  discussion.  'I  am  Choni  ha- 
Maagol  ! '  he  cried  for  the  second  time.  But  again  none  would 
believe  him,  neither  did  they  treat  him  with  honour.  Broken- 
hearted, he  left  the  haunts  of  men,  and  prayed  for  death,  and  his 
prayer  was  answered.  *  This,'  says  Kavah,  *  is  the  meaning  of 
the  saving  :  To  the  friendless  man  Death  cometh  as  a  blessing.' " 


THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS, 


141 


VIII. 


"The  House  that  Jack  Built." 


It  may  seem  strange  to  be  looking  in  the  holy  books  of 
the  Jews  for  the  origin  of  fairy-tales ;  but  what  would 
you  say,  my  reader,  if  you  found  in  them  the  source 
of  "The  House  that  Jack  Built;"  and,  moreover,  if 
you  were  told  that  this  queer  old  nursery  rhyme  is  but 
an  adaptation  of  a  solemn  Passover  hymn  of  ancient 
days,  by  means  of  which  the  Jewish  children  learned 
in  parable  the  history  of  their  nation  ?  The  poem  is 
found  in  the  Seder  Hagadah  (Passover  Service-Book), 
fol.  23,  1 83 1.  It  is  translated  from  the  Chaldee. 
I  take  the  interpretation  from  the  small  edition  pub- 
lished by  Vallentyne,  Bedford  Square,  London : — 


J.. 

A  kid,  a  kid,  my  father  bought 
For  two  pieces  of  money  : 

A  kid,  a  kid. 


Then  came  the  cat,  and  ate  the  kid, 
That  my  father  bought 
For  two  pieces  of  money  : 

A  kid,  a  kid. 

3. 

Then  came  the  dog,  and  bit  the  cat, 
That  ate  the  kid, 
Tliat  my  father  bought 
For  two  pieces  of  meney  : 

A  kid,  a  kid. 


The  kid,  a  clean 
fvnimal,  refers  to 
Israel,  "tlie  one 
peculiar  people  upon 
earth,"  which  God 
purchased  (Exod. 
XV.  16)  for  Himself 
by  means  of  the  two 
precious  tables  of 
the  Law, 

The  cat  refers  to 
Babylon.  "De- 
voured the  kid"  is 
descriptive  of  the 
Babylonian  captiv- 
ity,which  swallowed 
up  Jewish  nation- 
ality, A.M.  3338. 

Tlie  dog  means 
Persia,  by  whose 
power  Babylon  was 
overthrown. 


142  THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS. 


Then  came  tlie  staff,  and  beat  the  dog, 
That  bit  the  cat, 
That  ate  the  kid, 
That  my  father  bought 
For  two  pieces  of  money  : 

A  kid,  a  kid. 


The  sia^'is  Greece, 
which  put  an  end 
to  the  Persian  domi- 
nation. 


Then  came  the  fire,  and  burned  the  staff. 

That  beat  the  dog. 

That  bit  the  cat, 

That  ate  the  kid. 

That  my  father  bought 

For  two  pieces  of  money  : 

A  kid,  a  kid. 


The  fire  refers  to 
Rome. 


6. 
Then  came  the  water,  and  quenched  the 

fire. 
That  burned  the  staff. 
That  beat  the  dog, 
That  bit  the  cat, 
That  ate  the  kid. 
That  my  father  bought 
For  two  pieces  of  money  : 

A  kid,  a  kid. 


The  water  refers 
to  the  Turks,  de- 
scendants of  Ish- 
mael,  who  wrested 
the  Holy  Land  from 
the  power  of  Rome. 


7. 
Then  came  the  ox,  and  drank  the  water. 
That  quenched  the  fire, 
That  burned  the  staff, 
That  beat  the  dog. 
That  bit  the  cat. 
That  ate  the  kid, 
That  my  father  bought 
For  two  pieces  of  money  : 

A  kid,  a  kid. 


The  ox  means 
Edom  (the  Euro- 
pean nations),  who 
will  in  the  latter 
days  rescue  the 
Holy  Land  from  the 
possession  of  Ish- 
mael.  (See  Abar- 
banel  on  Ezek. 
xxxix. ) 


THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS. 


m: 


Tlien  came  the  butcher,  and  slew  the  ox 

That  drank  the  water, 

That  quenched  the  fire, 

Tliat  burned  the  staff. 

That  beat  the  dog, 

That  bit  the  cat, 

That  ate  the  Idd, 

That  my  father  bought 

For  two  pieces  of  money  : 

A  kid,  a  kid. 

9. 
Then    came    the    Angel  of  Death,   and 

killed  the  butcher. 
That  slew  the  ox, 
That  drank  the  water, 
That  quenched  the  fire. 
That  burned  the  staft', 
That  beat  the  dog, 
That  bit  the  cat. 
That  ate  the  kid. 
That  my  father  bought 
For  two  pieces  of  money  : 

A  kid. 


a  kid. 


The  hidcher  refers 
to  the  fearful  war 
which  will  then  sue 
ceed,  when  the  con 
federated  armies  of 
Gog     and     Magoi 
Persia,    Gush,    and 
Pul  will    come    u] 
"like  the  tempest' 
to  drive  the  sons  of 
Edom   from    Pale 
tme  (Ezek.  xxxviii 
xxxix. ). 


The  Angel  of 
Death  is  a  great 
pestilence,  in  which 
all  the  foes  of  Israel 
shall  perish. 


10. 


The  last  verse  de- 
scribes the  establish- 
ment of  God's  king- 
dom on  earth,  when 
Israel  shall  be  re- 
stored imder  Mes- 
siah, the  son  of 
David. 


Then  came  the  Holy  One,  blessed  be  He  ! 

And  killed  the  Angel  of  Death, 

Til  at  killed  the  butcher. 

That  slew  the  ox. 

That  drank  the  water, 

That  quenched  the  fire, 

That  burned  the  staff. 

That  beat  the  dog. 

That  bit  the  cat, 

That  ate  the  kid, 

Tliat  my  father  bought 

For  two  pieces  of  money  : 

A  kid,  a  kid.^ 
1  It  would  seem  as  if  from  this  ancestry  came  not  only  "TheHouso 


144  THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS. 


THE  TARGUMS. 

The  Talmud  has  tempted  us  so  far  beyond  our 
limits  that  very  little  space  is  left  for  dealing  with 
the  Targums,  the  Chaldee  paraphrases  of  Scripture 
in  use  for  the  teaching  of  the  people.  The  reader 
will  remember  the  scene  at  p.  6 1,  where  Ezra  read 
to  the  returned  exiles  from  his  manuscript  of  the  Law, 
and  the  Scribes  had  to  "  give  the  sense  and  cause  them 
to  understand  the  reading."  This  is  the  first  instance 
we  have  of  a  Targum  or  paraphrase.  It  afterwards 
became  a  regular  custom  in  the  synagogue,  for  the 
sake  of  the  common  people  who  had  lost  all  know- 
ledge of  the  holy  tongue,  that,  when  the  words  of 
the  Law  were  read,  an  interpreter  should  translate  into 
vernacular  Aramaic,  and  that  he  should  expand  his 
translation  into  a  free  paraphrase  of  the  meaning,  that 
all  the  people  might  easily  understand.  This  inter- 
preter, or  "  meturgeman  "  (our  English  word  "  drago- 
man," which  occurs  so  frequently  in  stories  of  modern 
Eastern  travel),  was  bound  by  certain  rules :  he  must 
i  wait  till  the  reader  had  finished  his  verse  or  pas- 
sage ;  neither  reader  nor  meturgeman  is  to  raise  his 
voice  one  above  the  other ;  the  meturgeman  must 
not  lean  against  a  pillar  or  beam,  but  stand  erect 
;with  fear  and  reverence ;   he  must  never  use  a  written 

that  Jack  Built,"  but  also  that  other  queer  doggerel  of  the  old 
woman  and  the  kid,  "Butcher,  butcher,  kill  Ox,  Ox  will  not  drink 
Water,  "Water  will  not  quench  Fire,  Fire  will  not  burn  Stick,  Stick 
will  not  beat  Kid,  and  I  cannot  get  home  till  midnight." 


THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS.  145 

"Targum,"  but  must  deliver  his  interpretation  "ex- 
tempore," lest  it  might  seem  that  he  was  reading  out 
of  the  Law  itself,  and  thus  the  Scriptures  be  held 
accountable  for  his  teaching. 

In  course  of  time,  however,  the  same  causes  which 
led  to  the  writing  of  the  Talmud  led  also  to  the  per- 
mission that  Targums  might  be  written,  and  thus 
these  paraphrases  have  come  down  to  us  to  help  in 
testing  the  accuracy  of  the  text. 

Their  value  for  this  purpose,  however,  is  but  small, 
not  only  on  account  of  the  loose  and  fanciful  nature  of 
their  comments,  but  also  because  the  oldest  dates  no 
farther  back  than  the  early  Christian  centuries,  when 
the  present  Massoretic  text  was  already  pretty  well 
established.  Their  freedom  in  dealing  with  the  Scrip- 
tures makes  it  difficult  to  tell  what  were  the  exact 
words  of  the  text  which  was  being  interpreted,  but 
it  is  clear  that  the  sacred  manuscripts  before  them 
must  have  corresponded  very  closely  with  those  in  our 
hands  to-day.  The  Targum  of  Onkelos  on  the  Penta- 
teuch is  the  most  valuable,  owing  to  its  keeping  so 
literally  to  its  text.  There  are,  besides,  the  Targum 
of  Jonathan,  the  Jerusalem  Targum,  and  others,  but 
it  is  not  necessary  to  enter  more  fully  into  details. 
Perhaps  the  following  little  specimen  may  interest 
the  reader,  and  give  him  a  clearer  idea  of  the  use 
of  the  Targums  for  the  purpose  of  textual  criticism  : — 


146 


THE  TALMUD  AND  THE  TARGUMS. 


BIBLE. 
Gen.  III.  22. 

And  the  Lord 
God  said,  Behold, 

THE  MAN  IS  become 
AS  ONE  OP  US,  TO 
KNOW  GOOD  AND 
EVIL :  AND  NOW, 
LEST  HE  PUT  FORTH 
HIS  HAND,  AND 
TAKE  ALSO  OP  THE 
TREE  OP  LIFE,  AND 
EAT,  AND  LIVE  FOR 
EVER. 


TARGUM  OF 
ONKELOS. 

And  THE  Lord 
God  said.  Be- 
hold, Adam  is  the 
only  one  in  the 

WORLD        knowing 

good  and  evil  : 
perchance  now 
he  might  stretch 
forth  his  hand, 
and  take  also 
from  the  tree  op 
life,  and  eat,  and 
live  for  ever- 
MORE. 


TARGUM  OF  JONATHAN. 

And  the  Lord  God  said 
TO   the  angels   that  were 

MINISTERING  BEFORE  HiM,  LO, 

THERE  IS  Adam  alone  on  the 

earth,  as  I  am  alone  IN  THE 
HIGHEST  HEAVEN,  AND  THERE 
WILL  SPRING  FROM  HIM  THOSE 
WHO  KNOW  HOW  TO  DISTIN- 
GUISH BETWEEN  GOOD  AND 
EVIL.  If  he  had  KEPT  THE 
COMMANDMENT  THAT  I  COM- 
MANDED HE  WOULD  HAVE 
BEEN  LIVING  AND  LASTING, 
LIKE  THE  TREE  OP  LIFE,  FOR 
EVERMORE.  NOW,  SINCE  HE 
HAS  NOT  KEPT  WHAT  I  COM- 
MANDED, WE  DECREE  AGAINST 
HIM,    AND    EXPEL     HIM     FROM 

THE  Garden  op  Eden,  be- 
fore HE  MAY  STRETCH  OUT 
HIS  HAND  AND  TAKE  FROM 
THE  FRUITS  OP  THE  TREE  OF 
LIFE,  FOR  IP  HE  ATE  THERE- 
FROM HE  WOULD  LIVE  AND 
REMAIN  FOR  EVER. 


DOCUMENT  No.  III. 
THE  BIBLE  OF  ''THE  SEVENTY.'' 


The  Apostles'  Bible. 

We  have  now  to  tell  of  a  very  wonderful  book,  the 
most  important  as  well  as  the  most  famous  version 
of  the  Bible  that  the  world  has  ever  seen.  It  was 
the  first  translation  of  Holy  Scripture  in  existence. 
It,  and  not  the  original  Hebrew,  was  the  Bible  chiefly 
used  by  our  Lord,  the  Bible  used  by  the  Apostles^ 
and  Evangelists,  the  Bible  used  by  Jews  and  Gentiles 
alike  in  the  early  days  of  Christianity.  It  is  the 
source  of  most  of  the  ancient  versions  of  the  Old 
Testament.  It  supplies  the  chief  theological  terms 
of  the  New.  It  is  to-day  in  the  Eastern  Church  the 
standard,  the  sacred  text,  fully  installed  in  the  place 
of  the  original  Hebrew. 

This  rival  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  text  was  the  cele- 
brated Greek  version  of  the  Old  Testament  known  as 
"  The  Septuagint,"  or  Bible  of  the  Seventy,  which  in 
the  two  centuries  before  Christ  was   the   recognised 

1  Out  of  thirty-seven  quotations  made  by  our  Lord,  thirty-three 
agree  almost  verbatim  with  this  version.  "  What  saith  the  Scripture  ?  " 
Bays  St.  Paul,  and  immediately  he  proceeds  to  quote  the  Septuagint. 


148  THE  BIBLE  OF  "  THE  SEVENTY P 

Scripture  amongst  all  tlie  "  Jews  of  the  Dispersion." 
What  our  Authorised  Version  is  to  the  English-speak- 
ing races,  that  was  the  Septuagint  to  the  ancient 
world.  It  was  the  "  People's  Bible,"  as  far  as  such  a 
name  is  applicable  in  speaking  of  those  ancient  days. 
It  was  written  in  the  popular  language.  It  was  sold 
at  the  popular  price,  comparing  with  the  Hebrew  as 
our  "  Shilling  Popular  Editions"  of  books  to-day  com- 
pare with  the  elaborate  guinea  volumes.  Consequently 
its  influence  was  very  important.  It  kept  alive  the 
knowledge  of  God  when  the  "  holy  tongue  "  had  fallen 
into  disuse.  It  spread  amongst  the  Gentiles  the  anti- 
cipation of  the  coming  Messiah.  It  was  the  safe- 
guard of  Judaism  amongst  the  scattered  Israelites 
until  Judaism  had  become  a  withered  branch  too  dead 
and  sapless  to  be  worth  safeguarding  any  longer,  and 
then  it  became  Christianity's  chariot  as  it  passed 
forth  from  its  birthplace  in  Palestine  to  conquer  the 
world.  Humanly  speaking,  it  is  hard  to  see  how 
Christianity  could  ever  have  succeeded  without  the 
Septuagint  Bible. 

Besides  all  this,  it  has  a  further  claim  on  our  atten- 
tion here.  It  has  much  to  do  with  Old  Testament 
Biblical  criticism  as  a  most  important  witness  of  the 
Hebrew  text,  from  which  it  was  translated  before 
Massoretic  or  even  Talmud  days. 

Whence,  then,  came  this  Septuagint  version  ?  Who 
were  its  authors  ?  Why  was  it  made  ?  Wliat  is  its 
value  in  the  investigation  of  the  text  ? 


ANCIENT  COPIES  OF  THE  SEPTUAGINT. 


<rc  rJ 

^  ..TipOC 

'•;■  /«?K»'rO: 

c-n-Ap-i( 

..  >-M  »»-!  o 

/rr\oy  ttcx 


CA\HMe3H 

NerKGHvp 

MOM  .NJ/^X^b 


ec^Tcucoicnx 

reHNHCiVpfT 


No.  1. — A  half-burnt  fragment  of  the  Codex  Geneseos  Cottonianus, 
a  very  valuable  Septuagint  Manuscript  about  1400  years  old. 

No.  2. — Facsimile  of  its  writing,  full  size. 

No.  6.— Beginning  of  the  29th  Psalm,  from  a  papyrus  manuscript 
of  Septuagint  in  the  British  Museum. 

{Photograjihed  by  kind  permission  of  Professor  Westicood,  Oxford,  from  the 
Paloeographia  Sacra  Pictoria.) 


To  face  imge  148.] 


THE  BIBLE  OF  ''THE  SEVENTY."  149 

II. 
The  Romance  of  Aristeas. 

There  is  a  curious  old  letter  extant  professing  to  be 
written  by  Aristeas,  a  distinguished  officer  of  Ptolemy 
Philadelphus,  king  of  Egypt,  in  the  third  century  B.C. 
It  carries  us  back  to  the  days  of  the  famous  Alex- 
andrian Library,  the  literary  treasure-house  of  the 
ancient  world.  It  tells  that  the  book-loving  King 
Ptolemy,  with  the  true  passion  of  a  collector,  had  set 
his  heart  on  adding  to  his  treasures  a  translation  of 
the  Hebrew  Pentateuch,  of  which  he  had  heard  through 
his  chief  librarian,  Demetrius  Phalereus. 

He  was  advised  by  Aristeas  that  it  was  no  easy 
matter  to  procure  it.  "You  certainly  will  not  get 
it,"  said  he,  "while  those  thousands  of  Jewish  slaves 
are  suffering  throughout  your  land."  (I  wonder  if  the 
King  knew  the  story  of  his  far-back  predecessors  and 
those  other  Jewish  slaves  which  his  new  document 
would  tell  of.) 

Ptolemy,  however,  was  not  to  be  baffled.  lie 
ordered  an  enormous  sum  of  money  to  be  expended, 
and  198,000  captives  were  immediately  set  free. 
Then  was  arranged  a  gorgeous  procession  to  Jeru- 
salem, of  which  this  host  of  freed  men  formed  the 
chief  part — a  second  exodus  of  Israel  from  Egypt. 
With  them  they  bore  splendid  presents  to  Eleazar, 
the  high  priest,  fifty  talents  of  gold,  seventy  talents 
of  silver,  besides  tables  and  cisterns  and  bowls  of  gold 


I50  THE  BIBLE  OF  ''THE  SEVENTY:' 

in  lavisli  abundance ;  also  a  letter  from  the  king, 
requesting  tliat  there  might  be  sent  to  him  a  copy  of 
the  Law,  and  Jewish  scholars  capable  of  translating  it. 

Then  comes  the  equally  gorgeous  account  of  the 
return ;  of  the  seventy-two  learned  Hebrews,  six  from 
each  tribe ;  of  the  exquisitely  fine  parchment  manu- 
scripts of  the  Law,  "  written  in  gold  in  the  Jewish 
letters ; "  of  the  royal  reception  prepared  for  them  in 
Alexandria ;  the  seven  days'  feasting  in  the  presence 
of  the  king ;  the  seventy  questions  testing  their  wis- 
dom ;  and  then  the  magnificent  study  prepared  for  them 
by  the  sea,  away  from  the  bustle  of  the  noisy  streets, 
where,  in  seventy-two  days  "of  co-operation  and  confer- 
ence," they  gave  to  the  world  the  Septuagint  version  ! 

Aristeas  had  surely  not  stinted  in  his  wonders ; 
but  in  his  day,  as  in  our  own,  such  stories  seldom 
lost  in  repetition.  So  we  find  in  the  early  Christian 
ages  the  additional  touches  that  there  were  seventy- 
two  separate  cells  -^  (some  say  thirty-six)  on  the  rocky 
shores  of  the  island  of  Pharos,  in  which  the  translators 
worked  independently  of  each  other,  and  it  was  found 
at  the  end  that  each  had  produced  a  translation 
exactly  word  for  word  with  all  the  others.  Therefore, 
of  course,  the  work  was  miraculous — a  direct  inspira- 
tion of  the  Spirit  of  God  ! 

When  it  was  ended,  Demetrius,  the  chief  librarian, 

1  Justin  Martyr,  in  the  second  century,  tells  us  that  he  was  shown 
by  his  guide  at  Alexandria  the  ruins  of  these  Septuagint  cells  !  If  his 
story  does  not  prove  the  inspiration  of  the  Septuagint,  it  proves,  at  any 
rate,  that,  in  the  matter  of  the  tales  of  tourist  guides,  there  is  nothing 
new  under  the  sun. 


THE  BIBLE  OF  ''THE  SEVENTY."  151 

summoned  the  Jews  of  the  city  to  the  house  where 
the  translators  had  worked,  and  read  the  translation, 
which  was  heartily  approved.  Curses  were  pronounced 
on  any  who  should  dare  to  add  to  or  take  from  it. 
The  Jews  received  permission  to  take  a  copy.  The 
king  rejoiced  greatly,  and  commanded  the  books  to 
be  carefully  kept.  He  gave  to  each  translator  three 
robes  and  two  talents  of  gold,  with  other  gifts;  to 
Eleazar,  the  high  priest,  he  sent  ten  silver-footed  tables 
and  a  cup  of  thirty  talents,  and  begged  that  any  of 
the  translators  who  wished  might  come  and  see  him 
again,  for  he  delighted  to  meet  such  men,  and  to  spend 
his  wealth  upon  them. 

III. 
Who  made  the  Septuagint? 

This  story,  substantially  repeated  by  Josephus,  by 
the  famous  Philo  the  Jew,  and  by  many  of  the 
Christian  fathers,  was  generally  received  as  the  true 
account  of  the  origin  of  the  Septuagint  until  about 
two  hundred  years  since.  It  probably  explains  the 
name  "  Septuagint,"  or  "  Seventy,"  applied  to  the 
version^  (which  is  usually  denoted  by  the  numerals 
Ixx.)  from  the  number  of  the  translators,  and,  doubt- 
less, it  also  accounts  in  a  great  measure  for  the  high 
repute  in  which  this  version  so  long  was  held. 

^  It  is  by  some  derived  from  the  sanction  given  to  the  version  by 
the  Seventy  of  the  Alexandrian  Sanhedrim.  It  is  held  by  others  that 
the  name  Septuagint  originally  belonged  to  the  Alexandrian  Library, 
from  the  number  of  its  founders,  and  was  thence  applied  to  this,  one 
of  its  most  famous  documents. 


152  THE  BIBLE  OF  ''THE  SEVENTY.'' 

It  is  now  universally  considered  to  be  a  mere  piece 
of  Eastern  romance,  invented  to  uphold  the  credit  of 
the  work.  But  it  undoubtedly  rests  on  a  basis  of  fact. 
All  the  evidence  points  clearly  to  the  facts,  which  are 
amply  confirmed  by  the  study  of  the  work  itself,  that 
this  Greek  version  originated  in  Alexandria  in  the 
time  of  the  earlier  Ptolemies,  about  280  B.C.,  and  that 
the  nucleus  of  the  work  was  certainly  the  Pentateuch. 
That  the  literary  tastes  of  the  Egyptian  king  had 
something  to  do  with  its  origin  may  also  be  true,  just 
as  in  New  Testament  days  a  Persian  translation  was 
ordered  by  the  Emperor  Akbar.  But,  clearly,  the  real 
cause  of  its  existence  must  be  sought  in  the  needs  of 
the  scattered  Jews  of  the  Dispersion,  who  knew  scarcely 
anything  of  Hebrew,  and  whose  common  language  was 
the  universal  Greek. 

One  part  of  the  story  that  must  certainly,  we  fear, 
be  put  aside  as  pure  fiction  is  that  of  the  Palestine 
manuscripts  and  the  scholars  from  Jerusalem  coming 
to  translate  them.  An  examination  of  the  work  itself, 
with  its  imperfect  knowledge  of  Hebrew,  its  mistakes 
about  Palestine  names  of  places,  its  Egyptian  words 
and  turns  of  expression,  its  Macedonic  Greek  which 
prevailed  at  Alexandria,  and  its  free  tendencies  in 
translation,  so  opposed  to  the  superstitious  literalism 
of  the  Jewish  schools,  at  once  puts  the  Palestine 
origin  of  the  version  completely  out  of  court.  It  was 
made  by  Jewish  scholars  of  Alexandria,  and  not  all 
of  them  very  good  scholars  either,  judging  from  their 
work.      They  show  in  many  places  a  very  imperfect 


THE  BIBLE  OF  "THE  SEVENTY.'  153 

knowledge  of  Hebrew,  and  indeed  of  Greek  too,  for 
that  matter.  They  frequently  mistake  ordinary  words 
for  proper  names,  and  sometimes  try  to  translate 
proper  names  as  if  they  were  ordinary  words.  The 
similarity  of  the  Hebrew  letters  is  one  of  their  great 
stumbling-blocks.  We  have  already  given  examples 
of  their  errors  from  this  cause  as  well  as  from  their 
differences  of  Hebrew  pronunciation.  There  are  many 
mistakes,  too,  from  the  wrongly  dividing  or  joining  of 
words  written  probably  without  any  division  in  the 
Hebrew  manuscript  before  them ;  as,  for  example,  in 
Ps.  cvi.  7,  al  yam,  "  at  the  sea,"  which  they  translate, 
alyam,  "  going  in." 

IV. 

Its  Critical  Value. 

As  to  the  value  of  the  Septuagint  in  Textual 
Criticism,  opinions  are  widely  divided.  Some  scholars, 
pointing  to  the  great  antiquity  of  the  translation,  and 
to  its  frequent  use  by  our  Lord  and  the  Apostles, 
would  have  us  receive  it  as  superior  almost  to  the 
Massoretic  Hebrew  text.  Others  would  entirely  ignore 
its  authority,  telling  us  that  its  variations  from  the 
Hebrew  arose  "out  of  the  carelessness  and  caprice  of 
transcribers,  their  uncritical  and  wanton  passion  for 
emendation,  and  their  defective  knowledge  of  the 
Hebrew  tongue"  (Keil.,  Introd.).  The  truth  lies 
between  these  extremes. 

It  is  true  that  this  Septuagint  has  been  translated 
from  a  very  ancient  Hebrew  Bible.     It  is  true,  too, 


154  THE  BIBLE  OF  ''THE  SEVENTY." 

that  in  the  time  of  the  Septuagint  translators  some 
variations  existed  in  the  Hebrew  text.  There  can  be 
little  doubt  either  that  in  some  places  at  least,  where  it 
differs  from  the  present  Hebrew,  the  Septuagint  pre- 
serves for  us  the  truer  reading.  But  it  would  be  very- 
dangerous  to  attempt  many  corrections  on  its  sole 
authority.  We  have  seen  already  what  stupid  mis- 
takes it  sometimes  made,  and  there  is  much  besides 
to  make  us  accept  its  evidence  with  great  caution  where 
it  differs  from  the  Hebrew. 

The  several  books  were  evidently  translated  by  men 
of  very  different  attainments  in  scholarship,  and  without 
any  after  revision  to  bring  the  various  parts  into  har- 
mony. Then  these  Egyptian  Jews  were  by  no  means 
hampered  with  the  rigid  Palestine  notions.  The  fact 
that  they  ventured  to  translate  the  Bible  at  all  out  of 
the  holy  tongue,  which  would  seem  almost  sacrilege  to 
the  Jews  of  Tiberias ;  their  admission  of  the  apocryphal 
books  into  their  Canon ;  and  still  more,  perhaps,  the 
existence  of  a  schismatical  temple  in  Egypt/  with  its 
priesthood  and  ritual,  while  they  still  recognised  Jeru- 
salem as  the  mother  Church,  all  indicate  a  tone  of 
thought  much  freer  and  less  scrupulous  than  that  of 
the  Holy  Land.  And  accordingly  we  trace  in  their 
translation  a  bold,  free  handling  of  the  text  before 
them,  often  expanding  and  paraphrasing  to  bring  out 

^  During  the  terrible  Syrian  persecution  in  Palestine,  about  200  B.C., 
Onias,  son  of  the  murdered  high  priest,  fled  to  Egypt.  King  Ptolemy 
received  him  kindly,  and  gave  him  a  disused  heathen  temple  at  Leonto- 
poHs,  which  was  converted  into  a  Jewish  sanctuary,  with  its  Aaronio 
priesthood  and  temple  ritual. 


THE  BIBLE  OF  "  THE  SEVENTY."  155 

the  sense,  or  to  gratify  their  love  of  diffuse  writing. 
Evidently  the  meaning,  not  the  strict  letter  of  the 
text,  was  the  chief  consideration  with  them.  True,  the 
sense  was,  on  the  whole,  fairly  rendered.  Indeed,  were 
it  otherwise  we  could  not  understand  the  use  of  the 
version  by  our  Lord  and  His  Apostles.  But,  at  thei 
same  time,  it  is  clear  that  this  freeness,  however  use- 
ful, is  a  serious  defect  in  an  instrument  of  textual 
criticism  when  the  object  is  to  find  out  exactly  what 
Hebrew  words  were  in  the  manuscripts  used  by  the 
translators. 

But  the  chief  difficulty  in  using  the  Septuagint  is, 
that  it  is  very  difficult  now  to  tell,  with  any  certainty, 
what  the  Septuagint  originally  said.  Even  in  the  days 
of  Origen,  1 600  years  ago,  it  had  already  grown  so  cor- 
rupt as  to  greatly  need  the  revision  of  it  which  he 
attempted,  and  unfortunately  his  well-meant  efforts  only 
made  matters  worse.  He  compared  it  with  the  Hebrew 
Bibles  of  his  day,  supplying  from  the  Hebrew  what 
seemed  to  be  omissions,  and  noting  what  seemed  to 
him  mistakes  or  additions.  These  additions  and  omis- 
sions, &c.,  he  denoted  by  asterisks  and  crosses  and 
other  literary  marks.  But,  as  might  be  expected,  in 
the  course  of  frequent  copying  these  marks  of  his 
got  often  misplaced,  and  often  dropped  out  altogether, 
so  that  the  cure  in  time  became  really  worse  than  the 
disease. 

Much  has  been  done  for  it  in  recent  years,  but  much 
still  remains  to  be  done,  in  the  collecting  of  ancient 
copies  and  recording  their   various   readings.      As  it 


156  THE  BIBLE  OF  ''THE  SEVENTY." 

stands  at  present,  the  revisers  cannot  well  be  blamed 
that  they  hesitated  to  use  it  more  freely  in  their  work, 
though  few  would  be  inclined  to  go  the  length  of  their 
American  confreres^  who  practically  advised  that  it 
should  be  rejected  altogether. 


Famous  Septuagint   Manuscripts. 

The  most  ancient  copies  known  of  the  Septuagint 
are  the  Vatican  Codex,  an  old  manuscript  of  the 
fourth  century,  preserved  in  the  Vatican  Library  at 
Kome,  and  the  "  Sinaitic,"  whose  romantic  story  is 
graphically  told  by  Dr.  Tischendorf ,  the  finder  of  its 
scattered  sheets  in  the  old  paper  basket  at  Mount 
Sinai  (see  photograph  on  opposite  page). 

A  little  later  in  date  is  the  Codex  Alexandrinus,  in 
which  we  have  a  special  interest,  as  it  belongs  to  our 
own  nation,  and  may  be  seen  any  day  in  its  case  in 
the  British  Museum."  -^  There  is  a  small  facsimile  of 
it  in  the  plate  facing  p.  149,  which  exhibits  also  the 
burnt  fragment  of  another  celebrated  Septuagint  copy, 
the  Codex  Geneseos  Cottonianus. 

1  For  an  account  of  these  manuscripts  see  the  writer's  *'  How  we  got 
our  Bible  "  (Bagster  &  Sons). 


?  ^  2  il 

^.  *L  V 


uJ  Z  ^ 


if* 

99  iz^ 

W  O  -^  >  *^ 

let*     fT  f  '         \J       ««•-•» 

/^  /-;  ^  y  ^ 

-H  -^^  <  ^  »^ 

;^  \/  ^^^  ^  ^ 

^    1    <    i-^ 

«<  U.'  1./;  !<  n 

it:  h  >~f:  5 

r^  ^  v^  ^  "*-• 

2  -<  c  ^0 


V  si  ^  !^  -< 


1 

ml 

^*^^      rf^      ""^ 


0^. 


itz 

JL  f^.  "^ 

'^  :<  X 

wpi  ^  ^ 
u.  V  ''i 


9    ^ 


0:: 


x^ 


DOCUMENTS  No.  IV. 

A  BUNDLE  OF  GREEK  BIBLES. 


A  witness  to  the  Bible  of  the  Scribes  and 
Pharisees. 

I  place  together  in  tliis  bundle  a  set  of  old  documents 
which  are  of  considerable  value  in  the  textual  criticism 
of  the  Old  Testament.  Chief  amongst  them  are  portions 
of  three  translations  of  the  Hebrew  Bible  into  Greek, 
made  during  the  second  century  a.d.  by  three  scholars, 
named  Aquila,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion,  and,  there- 
fore,  witnessing  to  the  Hebrew  text  that  existed  in 
the  time  of  our  Lord,  and  probably  long  before. 

I  dare  not  tax  the  reader's  patience  with  any  detailed 
account  of  these  old  Bibles.  Let  me,  therefore,^  draw 
forth  a  single  version  from  my  bundle,  and  give  it  and 
its  story  as  a  specimen  of  the  rest. 

Renegade  and  his  Bible. 

In  the  lovely  city  of  Sinope,  on  the  shores  of  the 
Black  Sea,  there  lived  in  the  second  century  a  heathen 
gentleman  named  Aquila,  a  man  of  high  position,  con- 
nected by  marriage  with  the  imperial  family  of  Eome. 


158  A  BUNDLE  OF  GREEK  BIBLES. 

One  advantage  of  being  connected  with  royalty  was, 
in  Aquila's  day  at  least,  the  choice  of  a  comfortable 
post  in  the  Civil  Service.  By  the  Emperor's  direction, 
he  was  commissioned  to  Jerusalem  to  examine  and 
report  on  certain  public  buildings,  and  while  residing 
there  the  amateur  surveyor  became  converted  to  Chris- 
tianity. 

He  was  not,  however,  a  very  satisfactory  convert. 
He  still  retained  many  of  his  heathen  superstitions ; 
and  one  day  it  was  found  necessary  by  the  heads  of 
the  courageous  little  Church  at  Jerusalem  that  he 
should  be  publicly  reprimanded.  It  was  not  the  first 
time,  nor  will  it  be  the  last,  that  an  honest  rebuke  has 
been  the  cause  of  a  "  'vert "  to  some  other  religious 
body.  Aquila,  in  anger,  joined  himself  to  the  Jews ; 
and  having  become  circumcised,  he  soon  began  to  pose 
as  a  most  zealous  defender  of  the  Mosaic  Law  and 
ritual. 

At  this  time  a  fierce  controversy  raged  between 
Jews  and  Christians  as  to  the  interpretation  of  certain 
Messianic  prophecies  in  the  Old  Testament ;  and  as 
the  Septuagint  was  the  version  chiefly  appealed  to  by 
the  latter  it  was  sternly  banned  by  the  Eabbis  as  the 
''  Christians'  Bible."  They  even  went  so  far  as  to 
compare  the  "accursed  day  when  the  seventy  elders 
wrote  the  Law  in  Greek  for  the  king  "  (Ptolemy)  with 
that  other  day  of  evil  in  the  ancient  time  "  when 
Israel  made  for  itself  the  golden  calf." 

It  was  necessary,  of  course,  under  these  circum- 
stances, that  there  should  be  a  Greek  translation  other 


A  BUNDLE  OF  GREEK  BIBLES.  159 

tlian  tlie  Septuagint  for  the  use  of  the  Jews  who  could 
not  read  the  Hebrew,  and  their  aristocratic  convert, 
being  a  man  of  some  scholarship,  determined  to  under- 
take this  task  himself. 

The  Jews  were  delighted  with  the  new  work,  and 
it  gained  so  large  a  circulation  that  a  new  edition 
(that  highest  pleasure  of  an  author)  was  called  for 
within  a  few  years  of  its  first  issue. 

This  is  the  specimen  version,  or  rather  the  remains 
of  it,  that  I  have  drawn  out  of  my  bundle  of  docu- 
ments to  exhibit.  It  follows  the  Hebrew  with  slavish 
literalness,  so  as,  indeed,  quite  to  spoil  its  own  Greek. 
But  this  defect  is  its  chief  virtue  for  the  purpose  of 
textual  criticism,  as,  of  course,  it  makes  it  easier  to 
find  out  the  exact  Hebrew  words  whicn  the  translator 
had  before  him.  It  would,  therefore,  be  a  most 
valuable  help  if  we  had  it  perfect ;  all  the  more 
so,  since  Aquila  is  said  to  have  become  a  student  of 
the  great  College  of  Tiberias,  and  on  that  account 
would  be  a  witness  to  the  very  best  Palestine  text. 
Some  interesting  traces  may  be  found  in  it  of  the 
controversial  purpose  with  which  it  was  prepared ; 
for  example,  in  Isa.  vii.  14,  "Behold  a  virgin  shall 
conceive,"  &c.,  where  he  translates  the  word  "  young- 
woman  ; "  not  exactly  a  false  translation,  but  yet  evi- 
dently intended  to  turn  the  point  of  the  Christians' 
argument. 

Any  notice  of  the  other  versions  in  the  bundle 
would  probably  only  tire  the  reader.  From  this 
account  of  Aquila's  he  will  form  some  notion  of  the 


i6o  A  BUNDLE  OF  GREEK  BIBLES. 

rest.-*  Therefore,  it  is  only  necessary,  further,  to  say 
that  the  evidence  of  these  versions  goes  to  show  that 
the  Hebrew  manuscripts  from  which  they  were  trans- 
lated in  the  second  century  corresponded  very  nearly 
with  the  Massoretic  manuscripts  in  our  hands  to-day, 
though,  at  the  same  time,  they  exhibit  some  inter- 
esting variations  which  the  Septuagint  and  other 
versions  frequently  support. 

^  St.  Jerome  tells  us  that  Aquila  sought  to  reproduce  the  Hebrew 
word  for  word  ;  that  Symmachus  aimed  at  a  clear  exposition  of  the 
sense ;  while  Theodotion's  object  was  to  make  a  revised  edition  of 
the  Septuagint. 


DOCUMENT  No.  V. 
THE    SYRIAC    BIBLE. 

I. 

St.  Ephraem  the  Syrian. 

Once  upon  a  time,  some  fifteen  hundred  years  ago, 
there  lived  a  great  father  of  the  Syrian  Church, 
generally  known  to  scholars  now  by  the  name  of  St. 
Ephraem  the  Syrian.  He  was  a  very  learned  and 
thoughtful  old  writer,  yet  his  name  would  probably 
have  been  as  little  remembered  as  that  of  many  other 
learned  and  thoughtful  writers  of  his  day  had  it  not 
been  for  its  connection,  partly  accidental,  with  two 
great  facts  in  the  history  of  Biblical  criticism. 

The  first  was,  that  when  the  old  man  had  been 
nearly  a  thousand  years  in  his  grave,  some  enthusiastic 
admirer  one  day  wanted  to  copy  out  one  of  his  lec- 
tures. But  parchment  for  the  purpose  was  expensive 
and  difficult  to  be  got.  So,  providing  himself  with 
a  piece  of  pumice-stone,  he  or  she — these  enthusiastic 
admirers  are  generally  ladies — coolly  scrubbed  out  the 
writing  of  a  very  ancient  and  valuable  copy  of  the 
Scriptures,  for  which  there  was  probably  little  demand 
in  that  day,  and  wrote  in  its  istead  St.  Ephraem's  dis- 
courses.     This  old  parchment  was  brought  from  the 


i62  THE  SYRIAC  BIBLE, 

East  witli  a  number  of  other  manuscripts  in  tke  six- 
teenth century,  and  afterwards  having  passed  into  the 
possession  of  her  family,  was  presented  to  the  Royal 
Library  at  Paris  by  the  infamous  Catharine  de  Medicis. 

In  later  days,  when  Biblical  criticism  had  become 
an  important  branch  of  study,  some  dim  traces  of 
the  ancient  writing  appearing  underneath  called  the 
attention  of  scholars  to  the  document,  and  by  the 
repeated  applications  of  chemicals  the  old  obliterated 
Bible  was  at  length  partially  restored,  and  the  Paris 
Library  thus  became  the  possessor  of  one  of  the  greatest 
literary  treasures  in  the  world,  a  Bible  manuscript 
dating  from  the  fifth  century.  From  its  accidental 
connection  with  the  lectures  of  the  old  Syrian,  this 
stained  and  blotted  old  Bible  is  now  known  as  the 
"  Codex  of  Ephraem."     (See  Plate,  opposite.) 

The  other  fact  is,  that  Ephraem's  greatest  work  was 
a  commentary  on  the  Syriac  Bible  of  his  day;  and 
long  ages  afterwards,  when  the  importance  of  the 
Syriac  Bible  became  recognised  in  textual  criticism 
and  all  the  ancient  Bibles  such  as  Ephraem  used  had 
utterly  disappeared,  this  commentary  of  his  became, 
of  course,  a  most  valuable  source  of  information  about 
the  old  Syriac  text. 

II. 
I   The  Oldest  Christian  Bible. 

This  Syriac  Bible  is  the  most  ancient  of  all  the 
Christian  versions.      It   was   evidently  growing   anti- 


Specimen  of  a  "PALIMPSEST"  Manuscript  like  that  op  St.  Ephraem. 
(Notice  under  the  writing  the  faintly  appearing  letters  of  the  Old  Bible 

tlmt  liad  l^onn  rnKKorl  out.) 


i|  '6-  -  t 

,|r'    "      f     r- 

M  '. 

1 

2st  f  ^ 

'1  'i  i  - 

f  I- 

S    *c<   • 

p  r 

c 

V 

*'4 

t . 

k  ,.it4 

^5     f- 

®     £     r     p  ^-1^ 


PkotorjyaphedfroDi  the  Dublin  Universitt/  Palimpsest,  Cotlex  Z 
To  j'u.ce  page  162.] 


THE  SYRIAC  BIBLE.  163 

quated  even  in  Ephraem's  day  (about  A.D.  350),  if  we 
may   judge    from    his    comments   on   the    text.      He 
constantly   finds   it    necessary  to    explain  words  and 
phrases  that  had  already  become  obscure  to  the  people 
of  his  time,  though,  by  the  way,  he  very  often  explains 
them  wrongly.      The  fact,  however,  that  such  explana-  ' 
tions  were  needed  is  most  probably  an  indication   of 
the  antiquity  of  the  Syriac  text  which  lay  before  him. 
Melito,  bishop  of  Sardis,  about  the  year  170,  quotes 
the  reading  of  this  Syriac  Bible  of  a  verse  in  Genesis ;  I 
and  the  great  Origen,  whom  we  have  mentioned  already,  ■ 
and  who  lived  about  A.D.  250,  tells  of  a  Syriac  Bible 
manuscript  in  the  possession  of  a  poor  widow  whom  he 
knew.     All  the  other  evidence  confirms  the  impression 
thus  left  on  us  as  to  its  date,  and  scholars  are  now 
almost  unanimous  in  placing   the  Syriac  version  not 
later  than  about  the  year  150  A.D. 


III. 
Letter  from  the  Lord  Jesus  to  a  Syrian  King. 

The  traditions  of  the  Syrian  Church,  however,  are 
by  no  means  satisfied  with  so  modern  a  date  for  their 
Bible.  One  opinion  puts  the  date  of  the  Syriac  Old 
Testament  back  to  the  days  of  Solomon  and  Hiram, 
when  all  the  Hebrew  books  written  up  to  that  date 
were,  they  say,  translated  into  the  Syriac  tongue. 
Another  tradition  tells  that  it  was  translated  by  the 
priest,  who  was  sent  to  Samaria  by  the  Assyrian 
king  (2  Kings  xvii.   28);   while  a  third   and   some- 


i64  THE  SYRIAC  BIBLE. 

what  more  plausible  statement  is,  that  the  version 
belongs  to  the  days  of  Thaddeus  the  apostle  and  Abgarus, 
king  of  Edessa,  the  correspondent  of  our  Lord. 

Have  you  ever  heard,  reader,  the  ancient  Church 
'  story  of  the  evangelisation  of  Syria,  the  letter  of  King 
i  Abgarus  written  to  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  answer  of 
our  Lord  to  that  Syrian  king  ?  The  story  goes  that, 
moved  by  the  account  of  Christ's  beautiful  life,  and  of 
His  unkind  reception  by  the  Jews,  and  needing  also  to 
be  healed  by  Him  of  a  sore  disease.  King  Abgarus 
sent  Him  a  letter  inviting  Him  to  his  land,  and 
generously  offering  to  share  with  Him  all  that  he  had. 
The  story  was  widely  believed  in  the  early  centuries. 
It  seems  a  pity  we  cannot  believe  it  still.  On  reading 
the  simple,  touching  letter,  one  is  almost  inclined  to 
regret  that  we  live  in  this  clearer,  colder  age  of  his- 
torical doubt  and  criticism,  in  which  all  those  beautiful 
old  legends  are  withering  away. 
f  Here  are  the  letters  as  given  by  Eusebius,  the 
great  Church  historian  in  the  fourth  century.  He 
says  he  found  them  in  the  archives  of  the  library  at 
Edessa,  and  translated  them  from  their  original  Syriac 
tongue : — 

(fTops  of  tje  ILettcr  Written  bg  l^mrj  ^bsants  to  JCSUS, 

antJ  sent  to  f^i'm  at  JJcrusaUm  &g 

Ananias  t]^e  (ITfluttcr* 

Abgarus,  Prince  op  Edessa,  sends  greeting  to 
Jesus,  the  excellent  Saviour  who  has  appeared 
ON  the  borders  of  Jerusalem.  I  have  heard  the 
reports  respecting  Thee,  and  Thy  cures  as  per- 


THE  SYRIAC  BIBLE.  165 

FOKMED  BY  ThEE  WITHOUT   MEDICINE  OR  THE  USE  OP 

HERBS.  For  it  is  said  Thou  makest  the  blind 
TO  see  again,  and  the  lame  to  walk.  And  Thou 
cleansest  the  lepers,  and  Thou  castest  out  im- 
pure spirits  and  demons,  and  Thou  healest  those 
that  are  tormented  by  long  disease,  and  Thou 

KAISEST  the  dead  ;   AND  HEARING  ALL  THESE  THINGS 

OP  Thee,  I  concluded  in  my  mind  one  op  two 
THINGS  ;  either  Thou  art  God,  and  having  de- 
scended FROM  heaven,  DOEST  THESE  THINGS ;  OR 
ELSE,    DOING    THEM,    THOU    ART    THE    SON    OP    GOD. 

Therefore,  now  I  have  written  and  besought 
Thee  to  visit  me,  and  to  heal  the  disease  with 

which  I  AM  afflicted. 

I    HAVE    heard    also    THAT    THE    JeWS    MURMUR 

AGAINST  Thee,  and  are  plotting  to  injure  Thee. 

I  HAVE,  however,  A  VERY  SMALL  BUT  NOBLE   ESTATE, 

which  is  sufficient  for  us  both. 


E\)z  lnslj3£r  of  JesUS  to  Iting  ^brjarus 
ijg  tit  €onxitt  Ananias. 

Blessed  art  thou,  O  Abgarus,  who,  without 

SEEING,  HAST  BELIEVED  IN  Me.  FoR  IT.  IS  WRITTEN 
CONCERNING  Me,  THAT  THEY  WHO  HAVE  SEEN  Me 
WILL  NOT  believe  ;  THAT  THEY  WHO  HAVE  NOT  SEEN 
MAY  BELIEVE  AND  LIVE.  BUT  IN  REGARD  TO  WHAT 
THOU  HAST  WRITTEN,  THAT  I  SHOULD  COME  TO  THEE, 
IT  IS  NECESSARY  THAT  I  SHOULD  FULFIL  ALL  THINGS 
HERE  FOR  WHICH  I  HAVE  BEEN  SENT,  AND  AFTER  THIS 
FULFILMENT  THUS  TO  BE  RECEIVED  AGAIN  BY  HiM 
THAT  SENT  Me.  AnD  AFTER  I  HAVE  BEEN  RECEIVED 
UP,  I  WILL  SEND  TO  THEE  A  CERTAIN  ONE  OP  My 
DISCIPLES,  THAT  HE  MAY  HEAL  THY  AFFLICTION,  AND 
GIVE  LIFE  TO  THEE  AND  THOSE  WHO  ARE  WITH  THEE. 

After  these  letters,  the  historian  gives  the  account, 
which   he    found   subjoined  to    them    in    the    Syriac 


166  THE  SYRIAC  BIBLE. 

tongue,  of  tlie  fulfilment  of  our  Lord's  promise  after 
His  AscensioUj  and  the  proclamation  to  Syria  of  the 
Christian  faith.  For  many  centuries  it  was  believed 
that  Edessa  had  a  charmed  existence,  being  imper- 
vious to  all  assaults  of  besiegers  through  its  possession 
of  this  divine  epistle. 


IV. 

Biblical  Criticism  and  the  Syriac  Bible. 

At  any  rate,  leaving  these  old  traditions  altogether 

j  out  of  account,  there  is,  as  we  have  seen,  clear  proof 

I  of  the  existence  of  this  Syriac  version  soon   after  the 

I  year  150.     It  is,  therefore,  the  earliest  of  all  Chris- 

i  tian  versions.     St.  Ephraem  teaches  us  by  the  words 

and  phrases  quoted  in  his  commentary  that  the  Syriac 

text  in  our  hands  to-day  is  substantially  the  same  as 

that  which  he  had  before  him.      We   find   the   very 

same  words  in  our  existing  Syriac  manuscripts.      And 

we  have  further  evidence  of  this  from  the  fact  that 

soon  after  his  day  the  Syrian  Church  split  into  three 

I  hostile  sects,  hating  each  other  as  heartily  as  did  the 

Jews  and  Samaritans,  but  all  three  nevertheless  using 

'  to  this  day  the  same  version  of  the  Scriptures.      This 

I  indicates  clearly  that  the  present  Syriac  Bible  must 

j  have  been  in  use  before  the  schisms  in  the  Church, 

I  since  we  cannot  believe  that  after  it  any  one  of  the 

i  three   hostile   parties  would  have   accepted   its  Bible 

from  another. 


SPECIMEN    OF    SYRIAC. 


PESHITO     VEESION. 

.  j6ot  )L2-C  <tl2»    .  joOTj  pf:5>  *Z.ocn  j;^  jJLaj 
OOTO    .  l-^-LX-jjii,    jlcnoj    ^oOT^J^^j    ULXo 

♦  ot3»>J    y  IkDO-ii^O    •.  5OTi-X)  |i)aj».;:L2i  j^OTOJ 

.  ^6.  OT.:2i^  -.  jch:^  ^i  r,^j;  )- j;^  j^^ 
.  j'OTOj    "^   ?OT»caj>    ji6>OT-m^   jlj   )Jot 

jOOT     OOT      |J      .    OT£^|-»       ,-J5uOT-J       .^?  \A. 
wOTO^j       .   IJOTOJ     "^     9OT.CGJ>    )J)      .    j^OTOJ 

<.*i:^5^s  icfij^f     /  jiU,  jjcncu  ;^^j6ot 

i  \>\  NO       .     jOOT      jL^fiXb^       .     ^v>\v\      j].|j 

OT^»^^     .  otjSj^  ij  Jl^qX^o     .  jocn   ot;l.JL5 
r'?    r^J      •   wOToI^^rii)     U   -OT^ii^fo      .    Ill 

.  ot.:Sl^£>  ^iVQ.cn.:oj  ,^Jj    .  ^oootJ  jot:^j 

.  o^L)  ick:^  ^i  \i  jt^^  ^J^-,^  ^^y; 

To  fact  page  i66.] 


THE  SYRIAC  BIBLE.  167 

The  great  value  of  this  Syriac  version  consists  in 
the  fact  that  it  is  a  translation  direct  from  the  Hebrew, 
many  of  the  other  early  versions  being  second  hand, 
made  from  the  Septuagint  translation.  And  its  value 
is  increased  owing  to  its  excellence.  It  comes  nearest 
to  our  ideal  of  what  a  version  ought  to  be.  It  re- 
produces its  original  faithfully,  and  as  far  as  possible 
literally,  seldom  or  never  relaxing  into  free  paraphrase. 

Of  course,  the  Hebrew  manuscripts  underlying  it 
are  many  centuries  earlier  than  Massoretic  days ;  many 
centuries  earlier,  it  may  be,  even  than  the  days  of 
our  Lord.^  It  has  several  small  variations  from  the 
existing  Hebrew  Bible,  sometimes  evidently  arising 
from  confusion  of  the  "  similar  letters"  or  from  read- 
ing the  vowels  differently  from  the  Massoretes,  but  in 
some  cases  exhibiting  quite  different  and  at  times 
a^Dparently  better  readings  than  those  of  the  Masso- 
retic text. 

Its  chief  defect  for  purposes  of  criticism  is  due  to 
traces  of  the  influence  of  the  Septuagint  upon  it.  It 
was  almost  inevitable  that  this  should  be  so.  The 
Septuagint  was  the  People's  Bible,  the  Bible  used  by 
our  Lord  and  His  Apostles,  and  circulated  all  over 
the  Christian  Church.  It  would,  therefore,  be  very 
likely  in  process  of  time  to  tinge  more  or  less  all  the 
Eastern  versions  of  the  Old  Testament. 

^  Christians  have  sometimes  unfairly  suspected  that  the  Jews,  in 
their  opposition  to  Christianity,  may  have  tampered  with  the  text  of 
Messianic  prophecies.  Therefore  the  importance  of  the  Syriac  Bible 
is  increased  by  the  fact  that  it  was  made  from  a  Hebrew  Bible  which 
existed  before  any  disputes  between  Jews  and  Christians. 


X68  THE  SYRIAC  BIBLE, 

The  Syriac,  like  all  the  other  ancient  Bibles,  still 
needs  a  great  deal  of  revision  before  it  can  become  a 
satisfactory  instrument  in  the  work  of  Biblical  criticism. 
But  there  is  ample  store  of  material  for  the  purpose. 
The  Vatican  and  other  great  Continental  libraries 
possess  several  important  copies ;  and  nearer  hand,  in 
the  galleries  of  the  British  Museum  is  a  richer  collec- 
tion til  an  any,  including  the  famous  library  treasures 
of  the  Monastery  of  St.  Mary,  Mother  of  God,  from 
the  Nitrian  deserts  in  Egypt.  So  there  is  only  want- 
ing— and  they  are  already  coming  forward — a  band 
of  earnest  scholars  to  work  at  these  old  manuscripts, 
and  give  to  the  world  a  Syriac  Bible  worthy  of  its 
ancient  history. 


DOCUMENT  No.  VI. 

THE  ''VULGATE''  OF  ST,  JEROME. 

I. 
The  Monk  of  Bethlehem. 

Towards  the  end  of  the  fourth  century  so  many 
variations  had  crept  into  the  Old  Latin  Bibles  that  the 
need  of  some  kind  of  revision  began  to  be  very  keenly 
felt  by  every  one  who  had  the  opportunity  of  comparing 
two  of  them  together.  There  were  almost  as  many 
different  "  editions,"  it  was  said,  "  as  there  were 
copies." 

Just  at  this  crisis,  when  the  leaders  of  the  Latin- 
speaking  Churches  were  casting  about  for  some  one 
to  help  them,  there  returned  to  Eome  from  his  Beth- 
lehem monastery  one  of  the  greatest  Biblical  scholars 
of  his  day,  Eusebius  Hieronymus,  better  known  to  us 
as  St.  Jerome,  and  his  high  reputation  pointed  him 
out  at  once  as  the  very  man  for  this  important  work. 
Jerome  was  not  very  willing  at  first  to  undertake  it. 
It  is  a  thankless  task,  ho  said,  and  will  only  arouse 
bitter  prejudice  amongst  those  "  who  think  that  igno- 
rance and  holiness  are  one  and  the  same."  However, 
he  was  persuaded  to  attempt  it,  amid  much  advice 
to    be   very  tender  of  the  prejudices   of   the  ''  weak 


170  THE  ''VULGATE"  OF  ST   JEROME. 

brothers,"  whose  consciences  were  so  sensitive  about 
meddling  with  the  Scriptures,  and  he  finished  a  rather 
cautious  revision  of  the  New  Testament  about  the 
year  385.  Then  he  began  a  Kevised  Version  of  the 
Psalms,  correcting  the  current  Psalters  by  means  not 
of  the  original  Hebrew,  but  of  those  Greek  versions  of 
Aquila,  Symmachus,  and  Theodotion  which  we  have  just 
described.  After  this  he  went  through  a  number  of  the 
Old  Testament  books,  with  a  good  deal  of  murmuring 
from  his  clerical  friends  that  he  was  going  too  far 
with  his  changes  in  the  Bible,  and  a  good  deal  of 
dissatisfaction  in  his  own  mind  that  he  was  not  going 
half  as  far  as  he  ought  to. 

At  last  he  grew  tired  of  this  cautious  patching  of  old 
versions,  which  no  amount  of  patching  could  mend,  and 
so  he  determined  on  the  bold  stroke  of  going  back  to 
the  fountain-head  and  translating  the  Old  Testament 
direct  from  the  original  Hebrew  manuscripts. 

It  was  a  very  serious  undertaking,  and  no  other 
scholar  in  the  Church  of  those  days  would  have  been 
competent  to  attempt  it.  But  Jerome  was  a  man  of 
great  resources.  He  was  a  most  industrious  and  ener- 
getic worker,  and  an  able  and  accomplished  scholar. 
He  was  no  novice  in  the  task  of  translating;  he  had 
learned  .  his  Hebrew  from  the  Palestine  Rabbis  ;  he 
had  teachers  from  the  College  of  Tiberias  privately 
assisting  him  ;  he  had  access  to  Hebrew  manuscripts 
probably  centuries  older  than  the  time  of  our  Lord. 
And,  therefore,  though  he  had  many  obstacles  in  his 
way  ;  though  his  Hebrew  scholarship  was  by  no  means 


SCRAP  OF  AN  "OLD  LATIN  "  manuscript,  the  version 

WHOSE  MISTAKES   LED    TO   THE   MAKING   OF  ST.  JEROME'S 

VULGATE  (see  p.  170). 


inirfl^t 


Photographed  from  Manuscript  of  Archbishop  Ussher's,  now  in  the  Library 
of  Trinity  College,  Dublin. 


To  face  page  1 70.  ] 


THE  "  VULGATE''  OF  ST.  JEROME.  171 

perfect ;  though  there  were  no  vowels  in  his  Hebrew 
manuscripts  to  assist  him  in  finding  the  meaning; 
though  the  fierce  popular  prejudice  against  changes 
considerably  hampered  the  freedom  of  his  work,  he 
produced  the  most  valuable  translation  of  the  Bible 
that  has  ever  been  made  before  modern  days.  No 
other  work  has  had  such  an  influence  on  the  history 
of  the  Bible.  For  more  than  a  thousand  years  it 
was  the  parent  of  every  version  of  the  Scriptures  in 
Western  Europe ;  and  even  now,  when  the  original 
Greek  and  Hebrew  manuscripts  are  so  easily  accessible, 
the  Khemish  and  Douay  Testaments  are  translations 
from  this  famous  "  Vulgate "  Bible  of  St.  Jerome,  so 
are  also  our  own  Prayer  Book  Psalms,  and  the  "  Com- 
fortable Words  "  in  the  Communion  Ofiice,  while  even 
in  the  Authorised  Version  of  the  Bible  its  influence 
is  quite  perceptible. 


The  "Temper  of  a  Saint." 

Such  a  howl  of  indignation  as  this  new  Bible  ex- 
cited !  Remembering  the  prejudice  which  our  recent 
English  Revised  Bible  excited  a  few  years  ago,  it  is 
instructive  to  recall  the  story  how  the  work  of  the  old 
monk  of  Bethlehem  was  received.  It  was  called  re- 
volutionary and  heretical;  it  was  pronounced  subversive 
of  all  faith  in  Holy  Scripture ;  it  was  an  impious  tam- 
pering with  the  inspired  Word  of  God ;  in  fact,  for 


172  THE  "  VULGATE''  OF  ST.  JEROME. 

centuries  afterwards  it  was  rejected  and  condemned, 
and  everything  was  said  that  ignorant  bigotry  could 
suggest  to  bring  it  into  disrepute.  What  a  lesson  on 
the  evils  of  senseless  prejudice !  What  an  instance, 
too,  of  a  brave,  honest  man  determined  to  follow  fear- 
lessly what  he  felt  to  be  right,  even  though  the  whole 
world  were  ao^ainst  him ! 

Even  his  greatest  friends  and  admirers  were  swayed 
by  the  popular  cry.  St.  Augustine,  who  was  scholar 
enough  to  understand  the  merits  of  the  work,  and  who 
had  in  the  beginning  praised  and  congratulated  him, 
got  frightened  at  the  last.  He  begged  him  to  let  it 
alone.  He  told  him  the  story  of  an  old  bishop  in 
Africa,  who  used  his  (St.  Jerome's)  new  -  fangied 
translation ;  how  one  day,  in  reading  the  Lesson  in 
Church,  he  read  the  word  "  ivy  "  instead  of  "  gourd," 
in  the  story  of  Jonah,  when  the  people  started  up  in 
wild  excitement,  and  refused  to  be  quiet  till  they  got 
their  old  Bible  back. 

Poor  St.  Jerome !  it  was  a  hard  time  for  him,  and 
his  letters  in  existence  tell  how  keenly  he  felt  it. 
Unfortunately,  too,  whatever  his  other  qualifications 
for  the  title,  the  old  man  had  certainly  not  the 
"  temper  of  a  saint,"  and  he  slashed  out  bitterly 
against  the  "  fools,"  the  "  stupids,"  the  "  two-legged 
donkeys  "  (hipedes  asellos),  whose  prejudices  had  raised 
such  an  outcry  against  him.  It  is  hard  to  blame 
him.  It  is  a  sad  story  to  look  back  upon — a  brave 
man  wearing  out  his  life  in  one  of  the  grandest  works 
ever   accomplished   for   the   Church,  and   seeing  this 


THE  ''VULGATE''  OF  ST.  JEROME.  173 

work   of  his  by   ignorant    bigotry   banned   and   pro- 
scribed to  his  dying  day ! 

It  was  long  after  his  death  before  its  value  was 
recognised.  Pope  Gregory  the  Great  first  set  the 
fashion  by  using  it  in  his  Commentary  on  the  Book 
of  Job,  and  it  is  almost  amusing  to  see  how  com- 
pletely the  tide  had  turned  at  the  time  of  the  Council 
of  Trent,  when  the  injured  old  scholar  had  been  a 
thousand  years  dead.  Men  had  then  grown  as 
attached  to  the  Vulgate  of  St.  Jerome  as  those  of 
the  fourth  century  had  been  to  its  predecessors.  In 
fact,  they  seem  almost  to  have  forgotten  that  it  was 
only  a  translation.  When  errors  were  pointed  out, 
they  quite  resented  the  idea  of  correcting  it  by  means 
of  the  old  Greek  and  Hebrew  manuscripts.  ''It  is 
the  version  of  the  Church,"  said  they,  "  and  in  the 
language  of  the  Church.  Why  should  it  yield  to 
old  Greek  and  Hebrew  manuscripts  which  have  been 
in  the  hands  of  schismatics  and  unbelievers  for  hun- 
dreds of  years  ? "  So  these  wise  scholars  invented 
an  easy  method  of  textual  criticism  for  themselves. 
Instead  of  going  to  the  trouble  of  comparing  the 
version  with  the  ancient  manuscripts,  they  settled 
the  matter  by  calmly  decreeing  in  Council  that  the 
old  Yulofate  should  be  received  as  "  authentic,"  what- 
ever  that  may  mean,  and  that  it  should  be  the  stan- 
dard version,  to  which  appeal  must  be  made  in  all 
matters  of  controversy.  An  interesting  exhibition  of 
the  feeling  at  the  time  is  a  passage  in  the  preface 
to  the  great  Complutensian  Polyglot  Bible,  where  the 


174  THE  "  VULGATE"  OF  ST.  JEROME. 

Hebrew  and  the  Greek  and  the  Latin  Vulgate  were 
printed  in  parallel  columns,  side  by  side,  the  venerable 
old  Vulgate  being  in  the  middle,  which  the  editors, 
with  grim  humour,  compared  to  the  position  of  our 
Lord  between  the  two  thieves ! 


in. 
Papal  Infallibility  and  Biblical  Criticism. 

We   have   seen   now  that    for    centuries    after    St. 

Jerome  the  Vulgate  had  been  banned  and  suspected ; 

;    indeed,  men  had  often  presumed  to  "  correct "  it,  so 

!    as  to  make  it  agree  with  the  corrupt  Old  Latin  Bible, 

•;    which   held   the   place   of   honour.      The   reader   will 

therefore  see  reason  to  believe  that  by  the  time  of  the 

Council  of  Trent  its  copies  had  probably  got  into  a 

state  very  much  needing  the   exercise  of  intelligent 

textual    criticism.      The    Council,    as   we   have    seen, 

contented  themselves  by  declaring  it  *'  authentic,"  and 

decreeing   that  "  hereafter  the  sacred   Scripture,   and 

especially    this    ancient    Vulgate    edition,    should    be 

printed  as  accurately  as  possible." 

About  forty  years  after,  Pope  Sixtus  V.  undertook 
to  bring  out  a  correct  edition.  His  method  was  a 
very  simple  one  indeed.  He  got  together  a  company 
of  learned  revisers,  but  with  this  understanding,  that 
their  functions  were  merely  to  collect  manuscripts  and 
prepare  the  evidence  for  and  against  certain  readings 
in  the  text,  after  which  the  Pope  himself,  by  reason 
not  of  his  scholarship,  but  of  his  gift  of  infallibility. 


THE  ''VULGATE''  OF  ST.  JEROME.  175 

decided  straight  off  which  were  the  genuine  words ! 
Then  it  occurred  to  him  that  it  would  be  a  good 
thing  for  the  credit  of  his  new  edition  if  he  forbade 
the  collecting  of  any  further  critical  materials,  lest  the 
authority  of  this  sacred  work  should  be  undermined. 
He  decreed  also  that  all  readings  varying  from  his 
edition  should  be  rejected  as  incorrect ;  that  it  should 
never  be  altered  in  the  slightest  degree,  under  pain  of' 
the  anger  of  Almighty  God  and  His  blessed  apostles 
Peter  and  Paul ;  and  if  any  man  presumed  to  trans- 
gress this  mandate,  he  was  to  be  placed  under  the  ban 
of  the  major  excommunication,  not  to  be  absolved 
except  by  the  Pope  himself! 

But  alas  for  "the  best  laid  plans  of  mice  and 
men "  !  Scholars  who  examined  the  new  book  very 
soon  learned,  if  they  did  not  know  it  before,  that,  as 
there  was  no  royal  road  to  learning,  so  was  there  also 
no  papal  road  to  criticism.  The  book  was  full  of  mis- 
takes. The  scholarship  of  Sixtus  was  by  no  means 
great,  and  his  infallibility  somehow  failed  to  make  up 
for  this  defect.  The  position  was  a  very  awkward  one, 
and  though  things  were  kept  quiet  during  the  life  of 
the  Pope,  as  soon  as  he  was  dead  it  was  strongly  felt 
that  his  Vulgate  would  bring  discredit  and  peril  on  the 
Church.  At  any  cost,  a  new  edition  must  be  prepared 
to  supersede  the  "infallible"  one.  But  the  credit  of 
the  deceased  Pope  must  somehow  be  saved  as  well. 
How  was  this  to  be  done  ? 

I  am  afraid  the  Jesuits  of  that  day  do  not  come  out 
of  the  matter  with  very  clean  hands.      Only  one  way 


176  THE  ''VULGATE"  OF  ST.  JEROME. 

seemed  open  to  them,  and  they  adopted  it.  "The 
mistakes  were  all  owing  to  the  fault  of  the  printer ! " 
Not  that  they  descended  to  a  deliberate  untruth.  Dr. 
Salmon,  in  his  recent  book  on  "  Infallibility,"  points 
out  the  delightful  equivocation  with  which  they  salved 
their  conscience.  "  Either  the  printers  were  to  blame, 
or  somcbccly  else"  said  they.  But  in  the  preface  to  the 
new  edition  brought  out  under  Pope  Clement  YIII. 
the  "somebody  else"  was  left  out  altogether,  and  the 
whole  blame  of  the  Papal  blunders  was  saddled  on  the 
unfortunate  printer. 


IV. 

The  Value  of  the  Vulgate. 

This  new  edition,  the  Clementine  Vulgate,  was  a 
considerable  improvement  on  its  predecessor,  but  was 
very  far  from  being  a  faultless  work.  Indeed,  a  satis- 
factory edition  of  the  Vulgate  now  may  almost  be 
regarded  as  an  impossibility.  So  many  causes  have 
united  to  corrupt  it,  that  it  is  one  of  the  hardest  prob- 
lems in  textual  criticism  to  restore  the  original  "  Bible 
of  St.  Jerome."  But  it  is  well  worth  doing  all  that 
can  be  done  in  this  direction  by  means  of  the  available 
ancient  sources. 

The  document  is  a  most  important  one.  It  is  a 
witness  of  the  Hebrew  text  at  a  very  early  period,  for 
Jerome  had  probably  manuscripts  before  him  of  an 


THE  ''VULGATE''  OF  ST.  JEROME.  177 

earlier  date  than  the  days  of  our  Lord.  And  it  must 
be  remembered,  too,  that,  like  the  Syriac,  the  Vulgate 
Old  Testament  is  a  translation  direct  from  the  Hebrew  ;^ 
not,  like  many  other  Christian  versions,  a  second-hand 
translation  from  the  Septuagint  Greek.  Therefore,  it 
is  worthy  of  much  more  pains  than  are  being  spent 
on  it  by  Biblical  scholars,  and,  even  in  its  present 
faulty  state,  is  a  most  valuable  aid  in  the  criticism 
of  the  Hebrew  text. 

1  This  is  not  true  of  the  whole  work.  The  Book  of  Psalms  and  a 
few  of  the  apocryphal  books  were  not  translated  from  the  original 
Hebrew,  but  were  taken  from  the  old  Latin  Bible,  slightly  revised  by 
St.  Jerome. 


M 


Book  5JI1 


THE   NEW  BIBLE. 

A   SPECIMEN   OF 

BIBLICAL    CRITICISM. 


CHAPTER  I. 

CRITICS    AT    WORK. 

I. 

Introductory. 

"  The  Old  Testament  is  sitting,  sir !  " 

It  called  up  rather  absurdly  reminiscences  of  the 
poultry-yard,  this  statement  with  which  a  pompous 
official  barred  the  entrance  to  the  Jerusalem  Chamber 
to  some  visitors  of  our  acquaintance  during  the  recent 
revision  days.  The  information  really  conveyed  was 
that  behind  those  closed  doors  the  Biblical  critics  of 
the  Revision  Company  were  working  at  the  materials 
accessible  to  them  for  producing  a  correct  version  of 
the  Old  Testament,  and  the  visitors  must  retire  with- 
out gratifying  their  curiosity  about  either  the  historic 
chamber  or  the  work  of  the  revisers. 

I  trust  the  reader's  interest  has  been  by  this  time 
sufficiently  aroused  to  make  him  share  their  curiosity 
in  the  latter  particular,  for  a  glance  at  the  work  in 
the  Jerusalem  Chamber  would  be  a  most  valuable 
illustration  of  our  "  Lesson  in  Biblical  Criticism."  We 
have  already  roughly  examined  the  accessible  material 
— the  "  Old  Hebrew  Documents  "  and  the  "  Other  Old 
Documents"  described  in  the  preceding  pages.     We 


1 82  CRITICS  AT  WORK. 

have  still  to  learn  tlie  method  of  using  this  material 
in  producing  a  correct  Bible,  and  the  easiest  way  of 
doing  so  is  by  watching  how  it  was  used  by  the 
scholars  of  the  Old  Testament  revision. 

The  reader  will,  of  course,  quite  understand  that 
this  is  not  a  book  about  the  Kevised  or  any  other  par- 
ticular version.  We  merely  desire  to  glance  here  at 
the  recent  revision,  as  the  most  convenient  specimen 
accessible  for  our  purpose.  Let  us  therefore,  in  fancy, 
put  aside  the  burly  janitor  from  the  doorway  and  view 
for  a  brief  moment  the  "  Old  Testament  sitting." 

11. 
"The  Old  Testament  Sitting." 

An  ancient  chamber,  grand  with  historic  memories, 
lined  round  with  cedar  and  with  curious  tapestry — a 
long  table  running  down  the  centre — a  band  of  men 
busily  intent  on  the  written  and  printed  sheets  that 
lie  spread  out  before  them — a  heavy  face  and  mono- 
tonous voice  arguing  as  to  the  value  of  a  verse  in  the 
Septuagint  which  differs  considerably  from  the  Hebrew 
under  discussion. 

That  is  all.  Nothing  that  seems  very  romantic  or 
interesting  about  it.  Does  it  differ  from  the  scene 
which  the  reader  expected  ?  Is  he  looking  round  him 
for  the  beautiful  gold  and  purple  Psalters,  or  the  rough, 
worn  edges  of  old  copies  of  the  Law  ?  Have  I  misled 
him,  by  the  previous  descriptions  of  the  material,  to 
imagine  the  floor  piled  with  faded  parchments  from 


CRITICS  AT  WORK.  183 

the  archives  of  the  East,  and  bishops  and  deans  and 
reverend  professors  grubbing  in  the  mouldering  dirt 
of  the  old  manuscripts,  hurrying  about  from  one  docu- 
ment to  another  to  investigate  the  evidence  about  the 
passages  in  question  ? 

Comfort  yourself,  my  reader.  The  parchments  and 
the  dirt  are  safe  in  their  repositories  all  over  the 
different  libraries  of  Europe.  The  dirty  work  has 
been  already  done.  For  a  hundred  years  past  patient 
scholars  have  been  toiling  in  many  lands  over  the 
masses  of  ancient  Biblical  lore,  and  the  results  of 
their  toil  appear  in  the  clean  and  carefully  prepared 
sheets  that  lie  on  the  revisers'  table.  Beside  each 
column  of  the  Hebrew  are  accurate  annotations,  tell- 
ing of  every  important  variation  that  has  been  dis- 
covered, whether  in  some  of  the  Massoretic  manu- 
scripts, or  in  the  Samaritan,  or  in  certain  copies  of 
the  Septuagint,  or  in  the  Syriac  or  Vulgate  versions. 
If  the  Talmud  or  Targums,  or  any  of  the  mediseval 
Jewish  commentators,  or  any  other  authorities,  have  light 
to  throw  on  a  passage,  their  information  too  is  carefully 
recorded.  So  that,  it  will  be  seen,  the  evidence  for  or 
against  any  particular  reading  is  manifest  at  a  glance. 

III. 
Defects  of  our  Specimen. 

Before  proceeding  to  examine  the  work  of  the  Old 
Testament  revisers,  it  is  necessary  to  remark  that, 
though  the   most   convenient   specimen,  it   is    by   no 


1 84  CRITICS  AT  WORK. 

means  a  good  specimen  for  teaching  how  the  various 
"  Old  Documents "  ought  to  be  used  in  producing  a 
correct  Bible.  There  are  defects  both  in  the  material 
used  and  in  the  restrictions  placed  upon  themselves 
by  those  who  used  them,  which  seriously  hinder  it 
from  being  a  good  illustration  of  the  processes  of 
Biblical  criticism. 

Partly  perhaps  from  unwillingness  to  run  counter 
to  popular  prejudices,  but  chiefly  from  difficulties  con- 
nected with  the  state  of  the  manuscripts,  the  revisers 
bound  themselves  to  a  close  adherence  to  the  Mas- 
soretic  Hebrew  Text.  Now,  however  they  might 
otherwise  differ  about  their  work,  they  all  knew  very 
well  that  this  text  was  in  many  places  of  questionable 
integrity.  Though,  on  the  whole,  it  is  safe  to  regard 
it  as  correct,  though  in  the  Pentateuch  it  reaches 
almost  perfect  accuracy,  yet  there  were  parts,  especially 
the  historical  books,  in  which  every  scholar  knew  of 
superficial  flaws  and  mistakes,  some  of  which,  too, 
were  not  very  difficult  of  correction.  But,  except  in 
rare  cases,  these  flaws  and  mistakes  had  to  be  allowed 
to  remain ;  the  revisers  considered  that,  in  the  present 
state  of  our  knowledge  on  the  subject,  it  was  best  to 
adhere  to  the  standard  Massoretic  text. 

A  good  deal  of  blame  has  been  attached  to  them 
for  this  "  want  of  boldness "  in  accomplishing  their 
work.  It  has  been  pointed  out  that  the  most 
ancient  Massoretic  manuscript  is  scarcely  a  thousand 
years  old ;  that  the  Septuagint  and  other  ancient 
versions  take  us  back  much  nearer  to  Old  Testament 


CRITICS  AT  WORK,  185 

times ;  that  they  often  give  readings  which  quite 
solve  difficulties  in  the  Hebrew  text,  and  have  every 
appearance  of  being  more  correct ;  that  sometimes  it 
is  easy  to  prove  from  their  translation  that  the  mis- 
take must  he  in  the  Hebrew,  and  to  see  exactly  the 
copyist's  slip  which  gave  rise  to  the  mistake. 

And  all  this  is  true.  The  Eevised  Old  Testament 
is  decidedly  behind  the  scholarship  of  the  age.  The 
work  is  a  timid  and  cautious  one.  There  is  lifctle 
doubt  that  the  next  revision,  whenever  it  takes  place, 
will  be  bolder  and  freer,  and  that  the  ancient  versions, 
especially  the  Septuagint,  will  play  a  larger  part  in 
fche  work.  Yet,  in  spite  of  all  this,  we  believe  that  the 
revisers  were  fully  justified  in  their  cautious  procedure. 

For,  in  the  first  place,  as  we  have  seen  already,  there 
is  every  reason  to  believe  that  the  existing  Hebrew 
manuscripts,  late  though  they  be,  differ  but  very 
slightly  from  those  in  use  at  the  time  of  our  Lord, 
and  probably  centuries  earlier.  The  most  important 
of  their  flaws  and  defects  are  of  very  ancient  times, 
before  any  critical  study  of  the  manuscripts  had 
begun,  and  before  any  of  the  versions,  except  perhaps 
the  Septuagint,  had  been  made. 

And,  in  the  second  place,  it  must  be  remembered 
that  the  versions,  the  only  means  of  correcting  the 
Hebrew,  are  at  present  in  a  most  unsatisfactory  state. 
The  different  copies  of  the  Septuagint  vary  consider- 
ably from  each  other,  and  this  too  is  the  case  with 
the  other  old  versions. 

Therefore  there  is  much  to  be  said  for  the  revisers' 


1 86  CRITICS  AT  WORK. 

explanation  that  tlie  time  is  not  yet  ripe,  that  "  our 
knowledge  at  present  is  not  sufficient  to  justify  an 
attempt  at  a  reconstruction  of  the  text  by  means  of 
the  Ancient  Versions."  The  fact  is,  we  were  not 
ready  for  an  Old  Testament  revision  at  all  in  this 
present  century.  The  amount  of  necessary  prepara- 
tion work  is  simply  enormous.  We  want  a  band  of 
scholarly  specialists  to  spend  years  in  collecting  and 
comparing  the  copies  of  the  Septuagint,  and  by  means 
of  their  critical  wisdom  to  find  out  as  nearly  as  pos- 
sible what  the  old  scholars  of  King  Ptolemy  really 
wrote  down  two  thousand  years  ago.  The  same  thing 
is  needed  for  every  one  of  the  old  versions,  as  far 
as  it  is  possible  to  do  it  for  them  now.  The  Hebrew 
manuscripts  themselves  also  need  a  good  deal  of  careful 
study. 

We  must  wait  for  all  this  to  be  accomplished.  And 
we  must  wait,  too — we  shall  not  have  long  to  wait — 
for  the  growth  of  a  spirit  of  common  sense  in  the 
public,  whose  prejudices  have  so  much  to  do  with 
rendering  any  new  version  a  failure  or  a  success. 
Our  "  Bible-loving  people "  must  learn  to  aspire  a 
little  higher  than  the  "  rhythm "  and  "  music "  and 
''  old  associations,"  whose  disturbance,  I  remember,  was 
the  chief  burden  of  their  criticism  in  the  days  of  the 
late  revision.  They  must  get  beyond  this  sentimental 
pietism,  and  see  that,  if  necessary,  all  things  else  must 
be  sacrificed  to  the  one  supreme  object  of  making  the 
Bible  mean  to  us  exactly  what  it  meant  to  its  original 
readers. 


CRITICS  AT  WORK.  187 

All  these  things  will  take  time.  On  the  whole,  it 
may  be  safely  asserted  that  for  another  half-century 
at  least  the  time  will  not  be  ripe  for  a  successful  Old 
Testament  revision. 

IV. 

Nineteenth  Century  Massoretes. 

Under  these  circumstances,  the  revisers  adopted  a 
safe  middle  course.  In  cases  of  evident  mistakes  in 
the  "  Old  Hebrew  Documents,"  or  of  very  plausible 
readings  in  the  "  Other  Old  Documents,"  they  acted  as 
did  the  old  Massoretic  revisers  long  ago — merely  give 
the  correction  a  place  in  the  margin,  only  in  very  rare 
cases  indeed  making  changes  in  the  text.  The  reader 
will  easily  understand  that  the  circumstances  which 
necessitated  this  cautious  procedure  must  considerably 
lessen  the  value  of  the  Old  Testament  revision  for  our 
purpose  as  an  illustration  of  Biblical  criticism.  For  a 
good  illustration  it  would  be  requisite  that  the  "  Hebrew 
Documents  "  should  be  freely  open  to  correction,  and 
that  the  ''  Other  Old  Documents,"  the  instruments 
of  that  correction,  should  be  in  proper  condition  for 
accomplishing  their  task. 

However,  by  carefully  selecting  our  specimens  for 
examination,  we  shall  probably  make  it  answer  sufli- 
cieutly  for  our  purpose. 


CHAPTER  II. 
SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK. 


"  Authorised  "  Reading.  Revisers'  Reading. 

Gen.  iv.  S:   And  Cain  talked         And  Cain  told  Abel  his  brother : 
with   Abel   his   brother  :    and   it     and  it  came  to  pass,  &c. 

came  to  pass,  when  they  were  in 

,,      „  ,,  ^,    ^  ^  .  .      .  Marginal  Reading. 

the  field,  that  Cain  rose  up  ai?ainst        _  ,  ^  .        .,,.,, 

.,,,.,      . ,  ■,■,!■  Hebrew  means,  Cam  said  unto  Abel 

Abel  his  brother,  and  slew  hira.  y^.^   brother;  and    many  ancient   an- 

thorities  have,    "said   unto   Abel  his 
brotlier,  Let  us  go  into  the  field." 

The  Hebrew  verb  here  means  regularly  said  to,  and 
wlien  we  meet  it  we  always  expect  to  find  after  it 
the  words  that  were  said.  But  there  are  no  such 
words  following  it  in  the  Hebrew  text.  Therefore, 
the  translators  of  our  Authorised  Version  saved  the 
sense  at  the  cost  of  the  grammar,  and  incorrectly 
translated  it  talked  with."  The  revisers  have  made 
a  partial  compromise — "  Cain  told  Abel."  The  words 
literally  translated  would  be  : — 

And  Cain 
SAID  TO  Abel  his  brother: 
and  it  came  to  pass  when 
they  were  in  the  field  that 
Cain  rose  up,  &c. 


,  SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK.  189 

One  is  therefore  inclined  to  suspect  that  the  line 
containing  the  words  which  Cain  said  may  have 
been  lost  out  of  the  text  by  the  slip  of  some  copyist. 
They  certainly  do  not  occur  in  the  "  Old  Hebrew 
Documents." 

In  this  difficulty  the  revisers  turned  to  the  "  Other 
Old  Documents  "  to  find  out  how  they  read  the  verse. 
First  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  was  called  as  a  wit- 
ness, and  it  read  : — 

And  Cain 
SAID  TO  Abel  his  brother, 
Let  us  go  into  the  field. 
And  it  came  to  pass,  when 
they  were  in  the  field,  that 
Cain  rose  up,  &c. 

This  seemed  a  very  likely  reading.  But  then  the 
Samaritan  witness  was  not  of  too  respectable  a  char- 
acter. It  had  before  been  convicted  of  altering  pas- 
sages to  make  them  read  more  smoothly  and  easily. 
Its  evidence,  therefore,  could  not  be  accepted  without 
confirmation.  Then  they  tried  the  Septuagint,  which 
read  just  the  same.  The  Syriac  (Peshitto)  was  called, 
and  then  St.  Jerome's  old  Vulgate,  and  last  of  all  the 
two  Jerusalem  Targums,  and  they  all  persisted  in 
inserting  the  words,  "  Let  us  go  into  the  field." 
There  is  a  passage  in  i  Sam.  xx.  1 1  which  also 
rather  favours  this  insertion :  "  And  Jonathan  said 
unto  David,  Come,  let  us  go  into  the  field.  And  they 
went  out  both  of  them  into  the  field." 


I90  SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK. 

It  was  argued  in  defence  of  the  Hebrew  reading, 
that  the  difficulty  about  the  meaning  of  the  verb 
might  have  made  the  other  documents  fill  up  the  sense 
by  inserting  these  words;  while  the  Hebrew  scribes 
were  so  scrupulous  about  the  letter  of  the  text  that 
they  would  not  meddle  with  it  on  any  consideration. 
This  may  have  been  so,  but  the  evidence  seems  very 
strong  against  it.  I  think,  from  the  tone  of  the 
revisers'  marginal  note,  that  they  were  very  much 
inclined  to  admit  the  disputed  words  into  the  text ; 
and  though  now  they  must  remain  out  in  the  cold  for 
the  present,  their  chances  of  admission  are  decidedly 
promising  whenever  the  next  Old  Testament  revision 
takes  place. 


''Authorised"  Reading.  Revisers'  Reading. 

Gen.  xlix.  6  :  In  their  self-will         In  their  self-will  they  houghed 
they  digged  down  a  wall.  an  ox. 

It  is  hard  to  say  which  of  these  is  the  right  reading. 
The  Hebrew  might  mean  either,  according  to  the 
vowels  supplied. 

HQHU  SHR  might  be  read  H^QRU  sh^e,  "  they  digged 
down  a  wall ;  "  or  HiQ^RU  SH^R,  "  they  houghed  an  ox." 
The  Septuagint  has  the  latter  translation,  and  it  seems 
to  allude  to  the  spirit  of  destructiveness  manifested 
(compare  2  Sam.  viii.  4) ;  but  most  of  the  other  ver- 
sions have  the  reading  of  the  "  Authorised  Version." 


SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK.  191 


III. 

"  Authokised"  Reading.  Revisers'  Reading. 

Josh.    ix.    4 :    The    Gibeonites  The  Gibeonites 

went  -  and  -  made  -  as  -  if  -  they  -  had-  took-them-provisions. 
been-ambassadors. 

There  is  this  improbability  against  the  "Authorised" 
reading,  that  one  does  not  quite  see  why  the  Gibeonites 
need  pretend  to  be  what  they  really  were.  That  they 
"took  them  provisions,"  which  is  the  reading  in  the 
Septuagint  and  of  nearly  all  the  ancient  versions,  fits 
in  very  well  with  their  statement  in  verse  12:"  This 
bread  which  we  took  for  provisions,"  &c. 

The  mistake,  on  whichever  side  it  exists,  is  simply 
the  confusion  of  our  two  mischievous  old  acquaintances, 
1  and  "1,  d  and  r.     Here  are  the  two  words : — 

( I .)  T^'^tOiin  =  Hitztayaru  =  acted-as-ambassadors. 
(2.)  ll'^JDikn   =  Hitztayaf^u  =  took-them-provisions. 

The  first  is  the  reading  of  nearly  all  the  Massoretic 
manuscripts.  Either  the  second  was  the  word  in  the 
ancient  Hebrew  manuscripts  which  the  Septuagint  and 
other  translators  worked  from,  or  else  they  mistook  the 
other  word  for  it.  Who  can  tell  which  is  right  ?  The 
reader  is  now  almost  in  as  good  a  position  to  decide 
the  question  as  were  the  revisers  in  the  Jerusalem 
Chamber. 


192  SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK. 


IV. 

*' Authorised"  Reading.  Revisers'  Reading, 

Judges  xviii.  30:  And  Jonathan,  And  Jonathan,  the  son  of  Ger- 

the  son  of  Gershora,  the  son    of  shorn,   the  son  of  Moses,   he  and 

Manasseh,  he   and  his  sons  were  his  sons  were  priests, 
priests  (to  the  Danites'  idol). 

Here  is  a  curious  case  of  tampering  witli  the  Hebrew 
text  sucli  as  the  Massoretes  would  never  have  dared  to 
attempt.  It  was  done  a  thousand  years  before  their 
day.  The  Hebrew  Bible,  following  the  best  manu- 
scripts, has  the  word  written  thus,  M^'SH,  the  N  being 
what  is  called  "  suspended."  The  name,  therefore,  is  read 
as  Mnsh  (Manasseh)  ;  though,  if  the  little  suspended 
N  were  removed,  it  would  be  MsH  =  Mosheh  (Moses). 

Clearly  "  Moses  "  is  the  true  reading,  for  Gershom 
was  the  son  of  Moses,  not  of  Manasseh,  and  Jonathan 
is  expressly  stated  to  be  a  Levite,  not  a  Manassite. 

So  far  the  evidence  of  the  "  Old  Hebrew  Documents." 
Now  let  US  see  what  the  "  Other  Old  Documents " 
have  to  say.  The  reading  "  Manasseh  "  appears  in 
the  Septuagint,  and  therefore  must  have  been  in  the 
Hebrew  manuscripts  used  by  the  famous  "  Seventy 
Translators."  It  is  found  also  in  the  Syriac,  and 
indeed  in  all  the  important  versions  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  Vulgate.  St.  Jerome's  old  Kabbis  must 
have  taught  him  that  it  was  wrong.  It  is  clearly  a 
reading  of  very  ancient  times.  But  in  spite  of  all 
its  supporters  and  all  its  antiquity,  the  reader  will 
easily  see  that  it  needs  to  be  corrected. 


SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK.  193 

There  was  probably  not  the  least  intention  amongst 
the  Jews  of  falsifying  the  text  in  this  place.  They 
scrupulously  kept  the  N  small  and  suspended,  and 
had  a  note  in  the  margin  calling  attention  to  it. 
It  was  only  that  they  hated  to  hear  the  name  of 
Moses  read  in  such  a  connection,  and  so,  to  spare 
their  feelings,  they  pronounced  it  as  Manasseh.'^  The 
Talmud  has  a  note  accounting  for  the  reading  : — "  Ger- 
shom  is  called  the  son  of  Manasseh.  Was  he  not  the 
son  of  Moses  ?  For  it  is  written,  The  sons  of  Moses 
were  Gershom  and  Eliezer.  But  because  he  did  the 
works  of  Manasseh  the  idolater,  the  Scripture  hangs 
him  on  to  the  family  of  Manasseh."  And  Kashi, 
the  Jewish  commentator  mentioned  already,  tells  us, 
''  For  the  honour  of  Moses  N  was  written,  but  it  was 
suspended  to  indicate  that  it  was  not  Manasseh,  but 
Moses." 


"Authoeised"  Reading.  Revisers'  Maegin, 

I    Sam.   xiii.    i  :    Saul   reigned  Saul  was  (thirty)  years  old  when 

one  year,  and  when  he  had  reigned  he  began  to  reign,  and  he  reigned 

two  years  over  Israel.  two  years  over  Israel. 

Beyond    all   question    the    Hebrew   Bible   is    here 
corrupt.      The  usual  formula  for  stating  a  king's  age 

at  his  accession  and  his  length  of  reign  is  : — " 

was  years  old  when  he  hegan  to  reign,  and  he 

1  With  the  same  object  they  substituted  hosheth  for  Baal  in  proper 
names,  Ishbosheth  for  Eshbaal,  Mephibosheth  for  Meribaal,  Jerubesheth 
for  Jerubaal,  &c.,  to  avoid  pronouncing  the  accursed  name. 

N 


194  SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK. 

reigned years."     For  example,    2   Sam.  ii.    10: 

"  Ishbosheth  was  forty  years  old  ivlien  he  leg  an  to  reign, 
and  he  reigned  two  years!'  2  Sam.  v.  4  :  "  David  %vas 
thirty  years  old  when  he  hegan  to  reign,  and  he  reigned 
forty  years ;  "  and  so  frequently  in  the  Books  of  Kings. 
Now,  this  is  the  formula  used  above,  and  it  cannot  be 
rightly  rendered,  as  in  our  Bibles,  "  Saul  reigned  one 
year ; "  it  should  read,  according  to  the  Hebrew, 
"  Saul  was  one  year  old,"  which  is  clearly  a  mistake. 
Probably  the  scribe,  in  writing  the  formula,  left  the 
numerals  blank,  to  be  afterwards  filled  in,  and  thus  the 
mistake  arose.  The  Septuagint  does  not  help  us  much. 
Some  of  its  later  editions  have  the  word  thirty,  as 
above,  but  the  best  MSS.  leave  out  the  verse. 

It  is  very  likely  that  in  the  ancient  and  less 
scrupulous  days  some  scribe  thought  this  a  con- 
venient place  for  inserting  in  his  manuscript  the 
usual  information  about  the  king's  age  and  reign. 
All  we  can  say  now  is,  that  this  verse  is  corrupt,  and 
we  cannot  tell  what  the  true  reading  should  be. 


VI. 

"Authorised"  Eeading.  Eevisers'  Margin. 

I  Sam.  xiv.  18  :  And  Saul  said  The  Septuagint  has — 

unto  Ahiah,  Bring  hither  the  akk  Bring  hither  the  ephod  ;  for  he 

of  God.     For  the  ark  of  God  was  wore  the  ephod  at  that  time  before 

at  that  time  with  the  children  of  Israel. 
Israel. 

The  Septuagint  here  is  very  probably  right,  though 
the  revisers  have  left  the  text  uncorrected.      Let  the 


SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK.  195 

reader  judge  for  himself.  Here  are  the  chief  con- 
siderations that  influenced  them  in  admitting  into  their 
margin  the  Septuagint  reading  : — 

(i.)  The  ark  was,  most  probably,  not  there  at  all  at 
the  time,  but  at  Kirjath-jearim  (i  Sam.  vii.  i,  2), 
where  it  remained  from  its  capture  by  the  Philistines 
until  David  removed  it. 

(2.)  The  ark  would  have  been  of  no  use  for  Saul's 
purpose.  He  wanted  to  ascertain  the  Divine  will, 
and  it  was  the  ephod,  not  the  ark,  that  was  the  instru- 
ment for  doing  so. 

(3.)  The  words,  "Bring  hither  the  ark,"  are  never 
used.  The  Hebrew  verb  here  is  suitable  only  to  the 
bringing  of  smaller  objects.  Bring  hither  the  ephod 
is  a  usual  expression  (see  chap,  xxiii.  9  ;  xxx.  7). 

(4.)  Moreover,  the  words,  withdraw  tJiine  hand,  i.e., 
desist,  would  not  be  appropriate  if  he  were  ordering 
Ahiah  to  get  ready  the  ark  to  be  carried  out  to 
battle. 

(5.)  The  mistake  of  ark  for  ephod  might  easily 
take  place.      Here  are  the  words — 

PIS^  =  Ark. 
IISK  =  Ephod. 

BesideSj  too,  it  was  noticed  that,  though  the  present 
authorised  reading  seems  so  smooth  in  English,  in 
the  original  Hebrew  it  is  defective  and  ungrammatical. 
Thus,  "The  ark  was  that  day  and  {not  with)  the 
children  of  Israel." 


196  SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK. 

On  the  whole,  I  think  the  reader  will  see  that  ifc  is 
extremely  probable,  to  say  the  least,  that  the  Septua- 
gint  preserves  for  us  the  correct  reading  which  was 
in  the  very  ancient  Hebrew  manuscripts,  and  that  our 
Massoretic  manuscripts  in  this  instance  are  corrupt. 


VIT. 

The  Story  of  David  and  Goliath  (iSam.  xvii.,xviii.). 

The  revisers  have  rightly  noted  in  the  margin  of 
I  Sam.  xvii.  1 2  that  the  episodes  immediately  before 
and  after  the  combat  with  the  giant  (i.e.,  vers.  12—31 
and  ver.  55,  &c.)  are  omitted  in  the  Septuagint.  It 
was  objected  by  some  that  this  note  was  not  justified, 
because  that  the  famous  Alexandrian  manuscript  of  the 
Septuagint  does  not  omit  these  parts.  This  is  quite 
true,  but  on  examining  that  manuscript  it  is  found  to 
be  almost  a  stronger  proof  than  if  it  had  made  the  omis- 
sion. Clearly  the  scribe  who  wrote  it  was  accustomed 
to  a  manuscript  which  omitted  these  disputed  parts. 
For  immediately  after  finishing  ver.  1 1  he  begins  the 
first  words  of  ver.  32,  as  if  they  were  the  words 
immediately  following,  and  then  suddenly  stops  and 
proceeds  to  incorporate  the  missing  section.  But  he 
does  not  score  out  the  words  of  ver.  32  which  he  had 
begun,  and  so  the  traces  of  his  correcting  himself 
remain  .  clear  in  the  manuscript  for  1 500  years. 
Most  probably  he  remembered  just  then,  or  some- 
body pointed  out  to  him,  that  the  Hebrew  manuscripts 


SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK.  197 

contained  this  other  section,  and  so  he  decided  that  it 
ought  to  be  in  the  text  in  that  place. 

Ought  it  ?  How  well  I  remember  as  a  boy  the 
difficulties  which  this  story  presented  to  me  as  it 
stands  in  our  English  Bible  !  Has  it  not  often  seemed 
strange  to  you,  reader  ?  Just  before,  we  are  told  how 
David  was  introduced  to  the  court  of  Saul,  and  became 
a  prime  favourite  with  the  king,  and  was  made  his 
armour-bearer.  Yet  here  he  is  represented  as  back 
amongst  the  sheep-folds,  sent  by  his  father  to  his 
brethren,  treated  by  these  brethren  with  a  sharpness 
such  as  kings'  favourites  are  certainly  not  often  sub- 
jected to.  Nay,  we  find  that  he  is  altogether  unknown 
at  court.  The  king  has  to  inquire  of  Abner,  who  is 
unable  to  answer  him,  ^'  Whose  son  is  this  youth  ?  " 

All  this  is  very  puzzling.  Strike  out  the  passages 
omitted  by  the  Septuagint  and  all  follows  smoothlj^ 
Ver.  3  2  follows  quite  naturally  after  ver.  1 1 ,  and 
xviii.  6  after  xvii.  54.  The  story  is  then  perfectly 
consistent.  Nay,  more.  The  Hebrew  text  shows  some 
traces  of  having  been  pieced  together  at  ver.  1 2,  and 
it  will  be  seen,  too,  that  the  omitted  passages  when 
put  together  form  in  themselves  a  complete  story. 
It  looks  very  like,  indeed,  as  if  the  Septuagint  were 
right,  and  that  these  passages  had  become  inserted 
in  the  Hebrew  text  out  of  some  other  written  account 
of  the  story,  or  else  that  they  have  got  out  of  their 
proper  place  in  the  book. 

And  yet  it  may  well  be  retorted,  as  it  often  has 
been,  that  the  Septuagint  translators,  not  feeling  their 


198  SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK. 

responsibility  about  the  text  as  the  Palestine  Jews 
didj  were  not  at  all  above  striking  out  passages  which 
presented  difficulties  to  their  minds.  It  may  be  so. 
Certainly  if  it  were  in  the  Pentateuch  it  was  asserted 
that  this  serious  interpolation  had  occurred  we  should 
be  very  slow  to  believe  it  except  on  the  most  indis- 
putable evidence.  But  in  the  early  ages  the  manu- 
script of  the  Book  of  Samuel,  which  was  used  more 
for  private  circulation,  and  never  regarded  with  the 
same  high  degree  of  reverence  as  were  the  Books  of 
Moses,  might  quite  possibly  have  had  this  disputed 
part  inserted  betw^een  its  leaves  by  some  private 
owner,  and  thus  become  the  source  of  an  error  such 
as  this. 

At  any  rate,  in  the  present  state  of  the  evidence 
the  revisers  would  not  be  justified  in  altering  the 
text. 

VIII. 

2  Sam.  xxi.  19  :  And  Elhanan,  the  son  of  Jaare-Oregim,  a  Beth- 
lemite,  slew  Goliath  the  Gittite,  the  staff  of  whose  spear  was  like  a 
weaver's  beam. 

Poor  Goliath  the  Gittite !  Surely  we  all  thought 
that,  if  w^e  knew  anything  of  Hebrew  history,  we  knew 
even  from  nursery  days  that  he  had  been  pretty  well 
killed  already  by  David  himself,  when  he  drew  the 
giant's  sword  "  and  slew  him,  and  cut  off  his  head 
therewith." 

Of  course,  we  at  once  suspect  some  corruption.  But 
how  are  we  to  hunt  it  down  ?     Fortunately  there  is  a 


SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK.  199 

parallel  history,  i  Cliron.  xx.,  evidently  copied  from 
the  same  source,  and  corresponding  word  for  word, 
except  that  it  tells  that  Elhanan,  the  son  of  Jaar, 
'•  slew  Zahmi,  the  brother  of  Goliath."  How  are  these 
two  statements  to  be  accounted  for  ? — 

Jaar  the  Bethlemite  slew  Goliath. 

Jaar  slew  Lahmi,  the  brother  of  Golla^th. 

At  the  sound  of  the  word  l^^hmi  the  Hebrew 
scholar  at  once  pricks  up  his  ears.  He  knows  that 
this  word,  being  in  what  we  should  call  the  objective 
or  accusative  case,  will  have  in  Hebrew  the  sign  of 
that  case,  the  particle  eth,  before  it ;  thus  eth-lhmi. 
Immediately  he  jumps  to  the  conclusion  that  the  word 
bthlhmi  (the  Bethlemite),  in  the  other  passage,  is  a 
mistake  for  ethlhmi.  Thus  set  on  the  track,  he  sees 
how  easily  the.  word  "brother"  might  have  become  lost 
or  confused  in  the  text. 

Eth-Goliath  is  jij^-Goliath. 

Brother  of  Goliath  is  TtJ^-Goliath. 

If  the  lines  be  placed  directly  under  each  other,  the 
reader  will  see  at  once  how  easily  a  copyist  might 
make  the  mistake  : — 

Ethlhmi  ''nj^-GoLiATH= (slew)  ETH-LaHMi,  brother  of  Goliath. 
Bthlhmi  J^^^-GoLIATH= Bethlemite  (slew)  Goliath. 


20O  SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK, 


IX. 

"Authoeised"  Reading.  Revisers'  Reading. 

2  Sam.  XV.  28  :  I  will  tarry  iu        I  will  tarry  at  the  fords  of  the 
the  plain  of  the  wilderness.  wilderness. 

The  reader  will  remember  what  has  been  said 
(p.  97)  about  the  Massoretic  marginal  notes,  the  Keri 
and  Kethibh.  This  is  an  illustration.  The  text  has 
"  Habaroth "  (fords),  the  Keri  (note  in  the  margin) 
says,  "  read  Haraboth  "  (plains).  It  also  interestingly 
exhibits  a  very  common  form  of  transcriber's  mistake. 
The  writer,  raising  his  eyes  to  the  copy  before  him, 
repeats  to  himself  the  word  "  Haraboth/'  and  then, 
before  he  has  half-written  it,  it  gets  confused  in  his 
mind  with  Habaroth,  which  is  so  very  like  it  in  sound 
and  appearance. 

It  is  very  hard  to  say  which  is  right.  The  Kethibh, 
"fords,"  looks  the  most  suitable  to  the  context  (see 
chap.  xvii.  1 6);  yet  all  the  ancient  versions  support 
the  Keri. 

X. 

"Authorised"  Reading.  Revisers'  Reading. 

2  Sam.  xviii.  13 :  Wrought  false-         Dealt  falsely  against  his  life, 
hood  against  mine  own  life. 

Here  is  another  of  the  Keri  notes.  The  text 
has  Naphsho  (his  life),  but  the  Massoretic  note  in  the 
margin  says,  "  Read  Naphshi "  (my  life).  As  already 
pointed   out,    we   cannot   place   much   dependence  on 


SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK.  201 

tliese  notes  of  the  Massorah  scribes.  We  have  to  use 
our  judgment  and  the  ancient  versions  in  deciding 
between  the  reading  of  the  text  and  the  margin. 
Here  the  evidence  of  the  versions  is  too  conflicting  to 
help  us. 

XI. 

"  Authorised  "  Reading.  Revisers' Margin. 

I  Kings  xiii.  12, 13  :  The  father  The    father    said    unto    them, 

said  unto  them,  Which  way  went  Which  way  went   he?     And    his 

he?     Now,    his    sons    had    seen  sons  shewed  him  which  way  the 

which  way  the  man  of  God  went,  man  of  God  went.     And  he  said 

And  he  said  unto  his  sons,  Saddle  unto  his  sons,  Saddle  me  the  ass. 
me  the  ass. 

Now,  reader,  which  of  these  two  readings  seems  to 
you  the  more  probable  ?  Is  it  not  beyond  question  the 
second  ?  The  father  asks  which  way,  the  sons  shew  him, 
and  immediately  he  commands,  "  Saddle  me  the  ass." 

But,  as  has  been  already  pointed  out,  it  is  a  dan- 
gerous thing  to  decide  by  our  notions  of  probability. 
Let  us  see  what  other  considerations  besides  decided 
the  revisers. 

Hebrew  verbs  have  what  we  may  call  a  causa- 
tive voice.  Thus  here  the  verb  to  see,  when  in  this 
causative  voice,  would  mean  to  cause  to  see,  i.e.,  to  shew. 
To  see  and  to  shew,  then,  are  parts  of  the  same  verb, 
and  are  to  be  distinguished  only  by  a  slight  difference 
in  the  vowels.  Therefore,  a  confusion  might  easily 
arise  between — 

Y^RU  =  his  sons  had  seen. 
y^BU  =  his  sons  shewed  him. 


202  SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK. 

So  when  this  alternative  reading  was  proposed  at 
the  revision,  the  first  inquiry  was,  What  does  the  old 
Septuagint  say  ?  And  on  examination  it  was  found 
that  it  read  "they  shelved,"  indicating  that  that  was 
how  the  translators  read  this  (vowelless)  word  in  the 
ancient  Hebrew  manuscripts  used  in  the  making  of  it. 

This,  together  with  the  plausibleness  of  the  reading, 
was  a  strong  point  in  its  favour.  Next  the  Vulgate 
was  questioned,  then  the  Syriac,  and  finally  the 
Tar  gums,  and  all  persisted  in  reading  with  the  Sep- 
tuagint, "his  sons  shewed  him." 

It  was  argued,  however,  on  the  contrary  side,  that 
the  Vulgate  and  Syriac,  tliough  translations  direct 
from  the  ancient  Hebrew,  might  have  been  influenced 
in  the  course  of  centuries  by  the  all-powerful  Septua- 
gint, and  therefore,  perhaps,  should  not  count  as  addi- 
tional witnesses.  In  any  case,  it  was  said,  the  Hebrew 
gives  a  good  and  fairly  probable  sense,  which,  without 
greater  reason,  ought  not  to  be  disturbed. 

Finally  the  question  came  to  the  vote,  and  since  a 
majority  of  two-thirds  was  requisite  for  any  change  in 
the  text,  the  new  reading  had  to  content  itself  with  a 
place  in  the  margin. 

XII. 

"Authorised"  Reading.  Revisers'  Reading. 

I  Chron.  vi.  28  :  And  the  sons         And  the  sons  of  Samuel ;    the 

of  Samuel ;  the  first-born  Vashni,  first-born  (Joel),  and  the  second 

and  Abiah.  Abiah. 

This  correction  was  certainly  needed,  and  it  is  a 
curious  instance  of  how  mistakes  arise. 


SPECIMENS  OE  CIUTICAL   WORK.  203 

We  learn  from  i  Sam.  viii.  2  that  the  first-born  of 
Samuel  was  Joel,  and  the  second  Abiah  ;  and  the  33rd 
verse  of  this  chapter  sjDeaks  also  of  Joel,  the  son  of 
Samuel.  Therefore  the  name  Vashni,  as  the  first-born, 
in  the  above  verse,  has  always  been  rather  a  puzzle, 
and  the  only  explanation  was  that  offered  in  the  mar- 
gin of  our  Authorised  Version,  that  Vashni  must  have 
been  another  name  for  Joel.  To  the  English  reader 
this  may  seem  a  fairly  plausible  explanation ;  but  let 
him  take  this  short  Hebrew  lesson  before  making  up 
his  mind : — 

V  is  the  Hebrew  conjunction  '^  and." 
SHNi  means  "  the  second." 
Therefore  vshni  =  "  and  the  second." 

Now,  the  Hebrew  manuscripts  read  thus : — 

And  the  sons  of  Samuel  i.e.,  And  the  sons  of  Samuel 

THE   FIRSTBOKN   VSHNI   AbIAH.  .     .     .     THE     FIRSTBORN,     AND    THE 

SECOND  Abiah. 

After  reading  the  name  Joel  in  the  other  passages 
as  the  first-born,  does  it  not  at  once  occur  to  the 
reader  to  suspect  that  the  word  Joel  has  by  some 
accidental  slip  of  a  copyist  dropped  out  of  the  text, 
and  that  the  copyist  consequently,  puzzled  by  the 
Hebrew  word  vshni  ("  and  the  second "),  where  no 
first  had  been  mentioned,  has  vocalised  it  as  a  proper 
name,  V^SHNi,  as  though  it  were  the  name  of  Samuel's 
first-born  ?  Supply  the  word  Joel  in  the  blank  space 
above,  and  the  whole  difficulty  disappears. 


204  SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK. 

This  is  one  of  those  extremely  rare  cases  where  we 
seem  compelled  to  go  against  all  the  Old  Documents. 
The  blunder  is  more  than  two  thousand  years  old.  It 
was  even  in  the  ancient  Hebrew  manuscripts  from  which 
the  Septuagint  translators  worked  two  thousand  years 
agOj  and  they,  of  course,  transferred  it  to  their  version, 
where  it  exists  to  this  day.  The  Syriac  is  the  only 
important  version  which  corrects  it. 


XIII. 
Ps.  xxii.  1 6  :  They  pierced  my  hands  and  my  feet. 

Here  is  a  very  remarkable  case  where  the  Hebrew 
text  has  been  entirely  deserted  in  our  English  Bibles 
for  the  preferable  reading  of  the  versions. 

We  saw  in  Bk.  i.  p.  i6  how  mistakes  might 
arise  from  the  confusion  of  the  two  similar  letters 
^  and  1  (y  and  ti).  Here  is  a  case  in  point.  The 
Hebrew  in  this  famous  passage  makes  no  sense  as 
it  stands.  The  word  translated  "  they  pierced  "  is  not 
even  a  verb  at  all.  It  is  a  noun,  ARI  (HK),  ''  a  lion," 
with  a  preposition  k'  (D)  prefixed,  so  that  it  reads 
K^ARi  (nj^3),  "  like  a  lion." 

"  Like  a  lion  my  hands  and  my  feet "  is  clearly 
sheer  nonsense.  But  if  the  little  >  at  the  end  be 
lengthened  to  *),  it  becomes  the  Hebrew  verb  K^^^U 
(")")^<D),  ''they  pierced."  Therefore,  of  course,  there 
can  be  no   doubt  that  this  is  the  right  reading,  and 


SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK.  205 

that  a  mistake  has  arisen  owing  to  confusion  of  two 
similar  letters. 

However,  to  make  assurance  doubly  sure  tlie  Ancient 
Versions  were  consulted.  The  Septuagint  reads,  "  They 
pierced ; "  the  Syriac  and  the  Vulgate  read  the 
same ;  and  the  other  versions  all  practically  confirm 
it,  though  some  of  them  read  a  slightly  different 
word. 

This  being  one  of  the  prominent  Messianic  texts,  the 
charge  of  wilfully  corrupting  it  was  brought  against 
the  Jews,  and  largely  believed,  too,  in  those  days,  when 
anything  evil  was  but  too  readily  believed  of  them. 
But  the  charge  is  utterly  unfounded.  Though  they 
kept  this  form  of  the  word  in  the  text,  they  always 
read  it  ''  they  pierced,"  and  it  would  seem  that  their 
reason  for  not  correcting  it  even  in  the  margin  was 
because  they  held  that  the  form  K.^ARi  was  gramma- 
tically consistent  with  the  correct  reading.  The  word 
occurs  only  once  more  in  the  Bible,  Isa.  xxxviii.  13, 
"  Like  a  lion,  so  tuill  He  hreah  all  my  hones,''  and  there 
is  an  interesting  note  in  the  Massorah  stating  that  it 
occurs  only  in  these  two  places,  and  that  it  has  a  dif- 
ferent signification  in  each,  thus  clearly  showing  that 
in  this  verse  of  the  Psalms  they  did  not  read  it  "  like 
a  lion."  The  fact,  too,  that  all  the  versions  read  it 
as  a  verb,  even  those  of  Aquila  and  Symmachus,  who 
were  so  deeply  imbued  with  the  teaching  of  the  Pales- 
tine Jews,  points  to  the  same  conclusion. 


206  SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK. 


XIV. 

"Authorised"  Reading.  Revisers'  Reading. 

IsA.   ix.    3  :    Thou  hast  multi-  Thou  hast  multiplied  the  nation  j 

plied  the  nation,  and  not  increased  Thou  hast  increased    to   it  the 

the   joy  ;    they   joy   before   Thee  joy  ;  ^  they  joy  before  Thee,  &c. 
according  to  the  joy  in  harvest,  &c. 

The  new  reading  is  so  much  more  in  keeping  with 
the  whole  jubilant  tone  of  this  Lesson  for  Christmas 
Day,  that  it  will  commend  itself  to  many  who  know 
nothing  at  all  about  the  reasons  for  changing  it.  The 
"not  increased  their  joy"  always  sounded  so  like 
a  discord  in  the  Christmas  music.  Yet,  when  we 
examine  the  Hebrew  manuscripts,  we  find  that  all, 
except  about  ten  or  eleven,  contain  the  objectionable 
reading.  What  right,  then,  had  the  revisers  to 
change  it  ? 

There  are  two  little  Hebrew  words  of  similar  sound, 
rather  like  each  other,  too,  in  appearance,  but  very 
different  in  meaning.      They  are— 

^i^  =  LO  =  not,  "^ 

i^  =  l'o  =  to  it  ; 

and  the  question  is  which  of  these  ought  to  be  in 
the  text.  If  the  first  be  right,  we  must  read,  "not 
increased  the  joy ; "  if  the  other,  "  increased  to  it 
the  joy." 

Now,  though  the  first  is  in  the  text  of  the  manu- 

1  Freely    translated,    '*  Thou   hast   increased   their  joy,"   Revised 
Version. 


SPECIMENS  OF  CRITICAL  WORK.  207 

scripts,  there  is  an  asterisk  placed  over  it  by  the 
Massoretic  scribes,  indicating  what  seemed  to  them  an 
error,  and  directing  us  to  a  footnote,  which  says,  "  Keri 
l'o,"  that  is,  '^  l'o  should  be  read."  True,  we  have 
sometimes  to  reject  these  Massoretic  corrections  as 
erroneous ;  but  here  the  context  seems  so  obviously  to 
require  this  reading,  that  the  revisers  felt  themselves 
compelled  to  accept  it,  more  especially  when,  on  ex- 
amining the  Targum  and  the  Syriac  and  other  ancient 
versions,  they  found  them,  for  the  most  part,  in  agree- 
ment with  it. 

In  Ps.  c.  3  is  a  similar  correction,  and  on  the 
same  grounds,  '-'It  is  He  that  hath  made  us,  and 
NOT  we  ourselves,"  reads  in  the  Eevised  Version,  "It 
is  He  that  hath  made  us,  and  we  are  His."  Here, 
however,  the  old  reading  seems  just  as  likely  to  be 
right  as  the  new  one. 


CHAPTER  III. 

A  FURTHER  USE  OF  THE  ANCIENT  BIBLES. 

I  WANT  here  to  illustrate  very  briefly  a  further  use  of 
the  "  Other  Old  Documents "  in  producing  a  correct 
Bible.  Where  a  word  occurs  only  once  or  twice  in 
the  Hebrew  Bible,  or  where,  from  any  other  cause,  its 
meaning  is  doubtful,  these  Old  Versions  are  very  use- 
ful in  settling  its  correct  translation.  True,  we  cannot 
always  entirely  depend  on  them.  One  of  them  will 
sometimes  contradict  another.  But  it  is  evident  that 
it  must  be  a  considerable  help  in  deciding  the  meaning 
if  we  know  how  men  two  thousand  years  ago  under- 
stood the  word.  Here  are  a  few  specimens  and  illus- 
trations : — 


!"  Authorised  "  Reading.  Revisers'  Reading, 


Gen.    xii.    6 :     Abrara    passed         Unto  the  oak  of  Moreh. 
through  the   land  .  .  .  unto    the 
plain  of  Moreh. 

The  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  word  is  doubtful.  St. 
Jerome  had  to  translate  it  in  making  his  Vulgate 
1500  years  ago,  and  he  rendered  it  the  plain,  and 
so  do  also  the  chief  Jewish  authorities.  But  the  old 
Septuagint,  600  years  earlier,  always   translates  the 


A  FURTHER  USE  OF  THE  ANCIENT  BIBLES.    209 

word  oak,  showing  that  that  was  the  meaning  it 
conveyed  to  them ;  and  the  Syriac  gives  the  same 
rendering. 


II. 


"Authorised"  Reading.  Revisers'  Reading. 

Gen.xxx.  11:  Leah  said,  A  troop!         Leah  said  Fortunate!  and  she 
and  she  called  his  name  Gad.  called  his  name  Gad. 

The  word  cried  out  by  Leah  was  Gad  !  It  might 
possibly  mean  a  troop,  but  it  is  not  easy  to  fix  its 
derivation.  In  our  difficulty  we  turn  to  the  Ancient 
Versions.  The  Septuagint  has,  "  In  good  fortune  !  " 
The  Vulgate  has,  "  Fortunately  !  "  The  Syriac  reads, 
"  My  fortune  cometh ! "  The  Targum  of  Onkelos, 
"  Fortune  cometh  !  "  the  Targum  of  Jonathan,  "  My 
good  star  cometh ! "  so  that  evidently  the  whole 
weight  of  ancient  testimony  favours  the  new  in- 
terpretation. 


m. 


"  Authorised  "  Reading. 

Ex.  xxxiv.  13  :  Ye  shall  destroy 
their  altars,  break  their  images, 
and  cut  down  their  groves. 


Revisers'  Reading. 

And  cut  down  their  Asherim. 

Margin. 
Probably  the  wooden  symbols  of  the 
goddess  Asherah. 


Here  is  a  case  where  the  English  versions  sought 
in  the  Ancient  Versions  the  meaning  of  a  word, 
and  were  set  wrong  by  thejn.     The  Hebrew  word  is 

0* 


2IO    A  FURTHER  USE  OF  THE  ANCIENT  BIBLES. 

ASHERIM,  and  the  old  English  translators  could  not  tell 
what  the  strange  word  meant  to  its  original  readers ; 
but  they  found  that  St.  Jerome's  Vulgate  translated 
it  "  groves."  St.  Jerome  had  probably  gone  to  the 
Septuagint  for  the  meaning,  for  we  find  it  thus  ren- 
dered by  the  old  scholars  of  King  Ptolemy.  Evidently 
they  were  as  much  puzzled  by  the  word  as  was  St. 
Jerome,  or  the  English  translators  who  followed 
his  lead.  Thus  the  word  "  groves "  got  into  the 
English  Bible,  and  thus  it  remains  to  the  present 
day. 

But  any  one  who  will  carefully  examine  the  different 
passages  where  it  occurs  will  see  at  once  that  it  cannot 
mean  "  groves."  To  "  make,"  "  set  up,"  "  break,"  are 
not  terms  generally  used  of  a  grove  of  trees.  It  most 
probably  denoted  some  movable  object  of  worship ; 
perhaps  a  figure  of  the  goddess  Ashtoreth,  or,  at  any 
rate,  some  rude  wooden  image  used  in  connection  with 
heathen  worship.  See,  for  e?:ample,  2  Kings  xxiii.  6, 
where  Josiah  brought  out  the  g7'ove  from  the  house  of 
the  Lord,  and  burnt  it,  and  stamped  it  to  powder ; 
2  Ohron.  xvii.  6  :  Jehoshaphat  took  away  the  groves, 
&c.,  &c.  The  revisers,  in  their  difficulty,  cut  the  knot 
by  simply  printing  the  Hebrew  word  in  English  letters, 
and  letting  the  reader  make  what  he  could  of  it ;  so 
now  the  time-honoured  "  groves  "  are  in  future  to  be 
known  as  the  '^  Asherim." 


A  FURTHER  USE  OF  THE  ANCIENT  BIBLES:     211 


IV. 

''Authorised"  Eeading.  Revisers'  Reading. 

Lev.  xvi.  8,  10,  26  :  The  other  lot  for  Azazel. 

The  other  lot  for  the  scapegoat. 

This  is  the  only  place  where  the  Hebrew  word 
AZAZEL  occurs  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  the  question 
of  its  meaning  is  a  long-standing  difficulty.  The 
English  versions,  from  the  "  Great  Bible  "  down,  have 
taken  the  interpretation  from  St.  Jerome's  Vulgate. 
He  renders  it  "  caper  emissarius  " — "  the  goat  that  was 
sent  out."  Probably  this  was  a  guess  from  the  con- 
text, or  perhaps  he  got  it  from  the  old  Bible  of 
Symmachus  (see  Book  ii.  p.  158),  who  gives  a  similar 
meaning.  The  Septuagint  translates  it  vaguely,  as  if 
at  a  loss  what  to  make  of  it.  Some  other  early  writers 
think  it  means  the  devil.  The  Jews  of  the  Middle 
Ages  tell  us  that  it  meant  some  evil  spirit.  Where 
all  was  so  hazy,  doubtless  the  revisers  acted  wisely  in 
leaving  it  as  they  found  it,  simply,  as  in  the  previous 
case  of  the  Asherim,  expressing  the  Hebrew  pronuncia- 
tion in  English  letters,  and  so  not  committing  them- 
selves to  any  theory  on  the  subject. 


"Authorised"  Reading.  Revisers'  Reading. 

Judges   viii.    13  :     Gideon   re-  Gideon  returned  from  the  battle 

turned  from  the  battle  before  the  from  the  ascent  of  Heres. 
sun  was  up. 

The  word  heres  does  mean  the  sun,  but  it  may  also 


212     A  FURTHER  USE  OF  THE  ANCIENT  BIBLES. 

be  a  proper  name ;  see  i.  35,  iL  9.  What  is  the  true 
meaning  ?  Did  Gideon  return  "  before  the  rising  of 
the  sun,"  or  "  from  the  height  of  Heres  ? "  The 
Vulgate  says  the  former,  and  most  Jewish  com- 
mentators agree  with  it.  The  Septuagint  says  "  from 
the  ascent  of  Ares."  Where  doctors  differ  who  shall 
decide  ? 


VI. 

"Authokised"  Reading.  Eeviseks'  Readino. 

2  Sam.   viii.   18  :   David's  sons  David's  sons  were  priests, 

were  chief  rulers. 

This  is  a  very  startling  translation,  if  it  be  correct. 
If  David's  sons  were  priests,  there  must  have  been  a 
serious  neglect  of  the  law  which  restricted  the  priest- 
hood to  the  family  of  Levi.  The  Hebrew  word  used 
is  the  same  that  in  v.  17  is  applied  to  Zadok  and 
Ahimelech  the  priests.  It  is  also  used  of  Ira  the 
Jairite  in  ch.  xx.  26,  and  later,  in  the  list  of  Solomon's 
officers,  of  Zabud  the  son  of  Nathan,  who  was  "  a 
KOHEN,  and  the  king's  friend."  But  surely  it  is  pos- 
sible that  it  may  mean  a  chief  minister  either  of 
Church  or  State.  The  Vulgate  renders  the  word 
"priests,"  and  is  followed  by  Luther  and  by  Cover- 
dale's  Bible ;  but  the  Septuagint  has  "  courtiers,"  and 
both  the  Syriac  Bible  and  the  Targums  have  "princes." 
So,  as  far  as  the  guidance  of  the  Old  Versions  will  take 
us  in  fixing  the  translation,  we  cannot  go  along  with 
the   recent    revisers.       The    question,    however,    is    a 


A  FURTHER  USE  OF  THE  ANCIENT  BIBLES.    213 

very  difficult  one,  and  important  issues  concerning 
what  is  called  the  higher  criticism  (see  footnote,  p,  37) 
are  affected  by  it. 


VII. 

"Authobised"  Reading.  Revisers'  Reading. 

I    Kings    xxii.    38 :    And    one  And  they  washed  the  chariot  by 

washedthechariotinthepoolof  Sa-  the  pool  of  Samaria,  and  the  dogs 

maria,  and  the  dogs  licked  up  his  licked  up  his  blood  :  now  the  har- 

blood,  and  they  washed  his  armour.  lots  washed  themselves  there. 

The  Hebrew  word  whose  meaning  is  in  question  is 
ZONOTH.  Now,  in  Hebrew,  of  course,  as  in  English,  it 
may  happen  that  entirely  different  meanings  may  grow 
on  to  the  same  word.'^  The  Hebrew  word  zonoth 
has  not  only  the  signification  armour,  but  also,  and 
much  more  frequently,  the  very  different  meaning, 
harlots. 

Which  does  it  mean  in  the  passage  before  us  ?  It 
is  possible,  to  be  sure,  that  the  writer  meant  to  inform 
us  of  the  washing  of  Ahab's  blood-stained  armour. 
But  considering  the  commoner  signification  of  the 
word,  does  it  not  seem  more  probable  that  he  meant 
to  give  an  additional  touch  of  ignominy  to  Ahab's 
wretched  fate,  by  telling  us  that  it  was  the  pool 
where  the  harlots  washed  themselves  in  which  the 
blood  of  the  dead  king  was  washed  from  the 
chariot  ? 

We  turn  to  the  Ancient  Versions  to  aid  us  in  the 
inquiry,  and  find  that  the  Syriac  Bible  eighteen  cen- 

^  Take,  for  example,  the  English  word  post. 


214   A  FURTHER  USE  OF  THE  ANCIENT  BIBLES. 

turies  ago  rendered  the  word  "  armour."  The  Targnm 
gives  the  same  signification.  But  the  old  Septuagint 
translators,  four  hundred  years  earlier,  give  it  its 
commoner  Hebrew  meaning,  "  The  harlots  washed 
themselves ; "  and  we  see  the  revisers  have  thought  fit 
to  follow  their  lead. 

I  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  question  as  to  which 
is  the  better  translation,  as  my  object  is  but  to  illus- 
trate this  use  of  the  Ancient  Versions. 

And  now,  reader,  our  "  Lesson  in  Biblical  Criti- 
cism "  is  over.  We  have  inquired  into  the  accuracy 
of  the  Hebrew  Writings,  we  have  made  the  acquaint- 
ance of  the  chief  Ancient  Bibles  of  the  world,  we 
have  learned  some  rudiments  of  Biblical  Criticism, 
and,  like  schoolboys,  worked  out  for  ourselves  little 
problems  in  our  newly-acquired  science.  I  trust  all 
this  may  have  been  worth  the  doing,  and  may  result 
in  a  more  intelligent  interest  in  the  Bible.  If  the 
"  Lesson"  bring  half  as  much  interest  and  instruction 
to  its  learner  as  the  preparation  for  it  has  brought  to 
the  teacher,  it  certainly  will  not  have  been  learned  in 
vain. 


II(DEX. 


Aaron  ben- Aster,  104 

Abgarus'  letter  to  our  Lord,  164 

Abomination  of  Desolation,  74 

Abram  and  the  fowls,  8 

Accents,  102 

Ancient  language  forgotten,  62 

Ancient  revision,  33 

Antiocbus,  75,  106 

Aquila  and  Symmachus,  78-83,  157 

Aristeas'  romance,  149 

Assyrian  writing,,  2 

Babylon  scliools,  104 
Bethsbemesn,  58  n. 
Bible,  narrow  escape  of,  jS 
Biblical  criticism,  22 
Book  of  tbe  Law,  39 
Breastplate  verse,  92 
Bucbauan's  manuscript,  29 

Cain  and  Abel,  123,  188 
Churcb  Hymnal,  Jewisli,  55 
Codex  of  Ephraem,  162 
Codex  of  Ezra,  29 
College  of  Tiberias,  yS 
Consonant  writing,  6 
Controversies,  textual,  15,  in,  121 
Copying  manuscripts,  103 
Criticism  in  Talmud,  81. 
Curious  mistakes,  7 

David  and  Joab,  9 

Defects  of  the  late  revision,  183 

Dotted  words,  68 

Eastern  memory,  10 
Edward  tbe  Black  Prince,  29 
Elias  Levita,  8  n.,  14,  90,  92,  109 
Epbraem  tbe  Syrian,  161 
Epistle  of  our  Lord,  164 
Errors,  insignificant,  113 
Esau's  teetb,  68 
Ezra,  5,  29,  60,  64,  65 


Fancy  shapes  of  Massorah,  19 

Gemara,  80,  126 
Ghenizas,  29,  35 
"  Gold  fur  the  Kings,"  96 
Great  Synagogue,  63,  &c. 
Guardians  of  tbe  Lines,  18 
Guild  of  Scribes,  13,  42,  44 

Halachah  and  Hagadab,  130 
Hebrew  writing,  1-3 
Hezekiab,  men  of,  42 
Higher  criticism,  37  n. 
Hilkiab's  discovery,  43,  45 
"  House  that  Jack  built,"  141 
How  to  read  without  vowels,  10 

Iddo,  book  of,  37,  41 

Infallibility,  174 

Ivy  and  tbe  gourd,  172 

Jacob  kissing  Esau,  68 

Jacob  ben-Naphthali,  104 

Jacob's  bed  or  Jacob's  stuif,  12 

Jabveb,  98,  103 

Jasher,  book  of,  37 

Jerome,  8,  84,  171 

Jerusalem  chamber,  181 

Jews  of  JNIalabar,  28 

Joab,  9,  17 

Josephus,  40,  46,  75,  76 

Jot  and  tittle,  5 

Judas  the  Maccabee,  2,  75 

Keri  and  Kethibb,  97,  200 

Last  of  the  Massoretes,  104 
"Let  us  go  into  tbe  field,"  52,  189 
Liver  of  goats,  17 
Longfellow,  139 


2l6 


INDEX. 


Manasseh  the  renegade,  49 
]\[anuscripts,  all  of  late  date,  31 
Manuscripts,  curious  old,  28 
Massorah,  88,  &c. 
Massoretes,  33-88 
Massoretic  manuscripts,  33 
Massoreth  Ham-massoreth,  8  n.,  92 
Mistakes  of  copyists,  16-21 
Michal,  17 
Moabite  stone,  2,  13  n. 


Nablous  manuscript,  119 
Nehemiah's  library,  66  n. 
Nitrian  manuscripts,  168 
"  Not  increased  the  joy,"  23,  205 

Origen,  84,  163 
Othman's  Koran,  34 


Palestine  text,  32,  86 

Phoenician  writing,  2 

*' Pierced  my  hands  and  my  feet, 

16,  59,  204 
Pillow  of  goat's  hair,  17 
Poem  on  the  alphabet,  93, 
Pope  Sixtus,  174 


Eepeated  passages,  53 
Revision,  ancient,  33 
Rip  Van  Winkle,  139 
Rock  of  ages,  25  w. 
Romance  of  Aristeas,  149 
Rules  of  criticism,  25 


Samaritan  Pentateuch,  2,  38,  49, 

118 
Sandalphon,  137 
Saul  one  year  old,  59,  193 
Schools  of  the  Proi^hets,  41 
Scribes,  13,  42,  44,  66,  80 
"Seen  on  the  wings  of  the  wind,' 

54,  57 
Septuagint,  71-74,  M7 
Shapira  manuscripts,  3 
Signing  of  the  Roll,  63 
Siloam  inscription,  3,  13  n.     , 
Similar  letters,  16 
Standard  Bible,  106,  109 
Symmachus,  157 
Syriac,  83,  161 

*'  Syria  "  mistake  for  Edom,  16 
Swine  broth  on  the  Bible,  75 

Talmud,  79,  126 

Targums,  144 

Temple  manuscripts,  40,  43,  106 

Textual  criticism,  22-27 

Tiberias,  78,  104 

Tittle,  5,  81 

Toledo,  its  famous  MS.,  29  n. 

Ussher's  manuscripts,  119 

Vashni,  59,  202 
Vowel  letters,  68 
Vowel  points,  7,  15,  101 
Vulgate,  170 

Yahveh,  98,  103 
Yod,  5,  16 


THE  ENB. 


J'RINTED  BY  BALLANTYNE,    HANSON  AND  CO. 
EDINBURGH  AND  LONDON 


SAMUEL     BAGSTER    &    SONS, 

LIMITED, 

15,   PATERNOSTER   ROW,   LONDON. 


AIDS  TO  THE  STUDY  OF  THE  GREEK  SCRIPTURES. 


THE   GREEK   STUDENT'S   MANUAL. 

A  Practical  Guide  to  the  Greek  Testament,  designed  for  those  who  have 
no  knowledge  of  the  Greek  language;  also  the  New  Testament,  Greek 
and  English;  and  a  Greek  and  English  Lexicon  to  the  New  Testament. 
Foolscap  octavo,  cloth,  6  s. 

THE  ANALYTICAL   GREEK   LEXICON  TO  THE 

NEW  TESTAMENT. 

The  words  of  the  Greek  Text,  however  inflected,  are  placed  in  alpha- 
betical order,  analysed,  and  referred  to  their  roots,  which  are  copiously 
explained,  so  that  the  precise  grammatical  force  and  English  meaning  of 
every  word  in  the  Greek  New  Testament  can  be  ascertained  with  very 
little  trouble.     Qaarto,  cloth,  7s.  6d. 

THE    STUDENT'S   ANALYTICAL   GREEK  TESTAMENT: 

Presenting  at  one  view  the  Text  of  Scholz  and  a  Grammatical  Analysis  of 
the  Verbs,  in  which  every  occurring  inflection  of  Verb  or  Participle  is 
minutely  described,  and  traced  to  its  proper  Root.  With  the  readings 
Textual  and  Marginal  of  Griesbach ;  and  the  variations  of  Stephens,  1550 ; 
Beza,  1598  j  and  the  Elzevir,  1633.     Square  16mo.,  7s.  6d. 

THE  POCKET  GREEK  TESTAMENT: 

With  various  Readings,  Parallel  References,  Indication  of  Roots,  Maps, 
Engraved  Tables,  etc.     32mo.     Cloth,  Is.  6d. 

A  PRACTICAL  GUIDE  TO  THE  STUDY  OF  THE  GREEK 
NEW  TESTAMENT. 

Foolscap  octavo,  cloth,  price  Is. 

THE   NEW   TESTAMENT,   GREEK  AND   ENGLISH. 

The  Textus  Receptus  with  the  Authorized  Version  in  parallel  columns  j 
with  various  readings.     Quarto,  cloth,  5b.  p 


SIXTH  EDITION  (25.000)  Is. 

Dow  we 

(5ot  our  IBMc. 

An  Answer  to  Questions  suggested  by 
the  Late  Revision. 


BY 

J.  PATEKSON  SMYTH,  LL.B.,  B.D. 


Mult39  terricoUs  linguw,  ccelestlbus  una. 


LONDON : 

SAMUEL  BAGSTER  &  SONS,  LIMITED. 

DUBLIN :  EASON  &  SON,  LIMITED. 


OPINIONS    OF    TEE    PRESS, 

AND   OF  EMINENT  PERSONS. 

Letter  from  the  Bishop  of  Berry. — Palace,  Derey,  Jan.  1886. 
"  I  can  safely  say  that  my  attention  was  throughout  stimulated, 
and  that  my  interest  never  flagged  from  the  first  page  to  the  last. 
There  are  few  scholars  who  may  not  learn  from  Mr.  Smyth." 

William,  Derry  and  Eapuoe. 


*'  It  gives  much  interesting  information  vrith  admirable  simplicity." 

Archdeacon  Farrar. 


"  This  little  volume  is  indispensable  to  the  Bible  reader  who  wishes 
to  have  in  small  compass  an  account  of  ancient  manuscripts  and  early 
versions.     It  supplies  a  felt  need." — The  Christian. 

"  We  have  seldom  met  with  a  better  written  digest  of  the  history 
of  our  English  Bible.  It  might  honestly  have  been  presented  to  the 
public  as  a  five-shilling  volume." — Sword  and  Trowel. 

"  In  these  pages  a  flood  of  light  is  thrown  on  the  sources  of  our 
English  version,  most  valuable  in  answer  to  questions  raised  by  the 
new  revision." — Word  and  Work. 

"This  volume  is  partly  historical,  partly  bibliographical,  and 
partly  critical.  .  .  .  Anybody  can  understand  it,  and  everybody 
would  be  better  for  the  thoughtful  study  of  it." — Christian  Advocate. 

"  Gives  an  excellent  and  comprehensive  account  for  popular  reading 
of  the  ancient  manuscripts  of  the  Bible." — The  Christian  World. 

"  It  ought  to  find  its  way  into  our  Training  Colleges,  Bible  Classes, 
and  Upper  Classes  in  Schools." — Ecclesiastical  Gazette. 

"  This  little  book  deserves  the  attention  of  the  large  number  of 
professing  Christians  who  cannot  devote  the  time  to  the  larger 
histories  of  our  English  Bible." — Presbyterian  Churchman. 

"  The  book  is  a  fine  study  of  the  history  of  the  Bible,  and  should 
be  read  attentively  and  with  profit." — Publishers'  Circular. 

"This  very  interesting  little  work  cannot  fail  to  be  highly i 
appreciated." — Northern  Whig. 

"  This  is  a  capital  little  hand-book  on  the  history  of  the  Bible, 
which  should  be  in  the  hands  of  every  teacher  and  preacher." — The 

Primitive  Methodist  World. 

"The  author  has  done  good  service  by  this  most  interesting  and 
instructive  little  book." — The  Messenger. 

"  Mr.  Smyth  possesses  the  true  teaching  instinct.  .  .  .  We 
have  never  before  seen  so  much  valuable  information  on  the  subject 
conveyed  in  so  portable  a  form,  and  in  such  clear  and  interesting 
Btyle." — Dublin  Daily  Express. 

"  This  book  supplies  a  real  need." — Christian  Commonwealth. 

"  This  is  altogether  an  admirable  little  book." — Dublin  Evg.  Mail. 


BAGSTER'S    BIBLES. 

From  4s.  to  £2  2s. 


MAPS,   REFERENCES,  AND  HELPS. 
In  French  morocco  circuit,  with  projecting  edges  and  elastic  band. 

THE     MINIATURE     BIBLE,    5|  by  3|.     Price  48. 

THE   MEDIUM  BIBLE.    5s.  6d. 

THE  FACSIMILE  OCTAVO   BIBLE.    lOs.  6d. 


BAGSTER'S  LIMP    KID-LINED   BIBLES. 

Levant  morocco,  silk  sewn,  perfectly  supple. 
THE  ONLY  BIBLES  THAT  WILL  LAST  A  LIFETIME, 

No.    L  THE  MINIATURE  POLYGLOT  BIBLE,  price  £1. 
M    II.  THE  MEDIUM  POLYGLOT  BIBLE,  price  £i  5s. 
„  in.  THE    FACSIMILE    LARGE-PRINT    POLYGLOT 

BIBLE,  price  £1  10s. 

,,  IV.  THE    FACSIMILE    LAKGE-PRINT    POLYGLOT 

BIBLE,  on  Writing  Paper,  with  Broad  Margins  for  MS. 
Notes.     Quarto,  price  £2  2s. 

„    V.  THE    MEDIUM    POLYGLOT    BIBLE,    with   wide 

margins.     4to,  price  £1  lis.  6d. 


Full  Catalogues  of  Bibles  or  Students'  Boohs  sent  by 
return  of  post^  free. 


SAMUEL   BAGSTER   &    SONS,   Limited, 

15  PATERNOSTEK  ROW.  LONDON. 


COMPREHENSIVE 

TEACHERS'    BIBLE. 

With  New  Helps,  New  Concordance,  Indexed  Atlas  and 
the  Complete  Bagster  Bible. 

THE    ONLY   TEACHERS'    BIBLE    PUBLISHED 
SINCE  THE  REVISED  VERSION. 


INDIA    PAPER    EDITIONS, 


THE  TIMES. — "Treats  of  an  immense  variety  of  subjects.     Well 

printed  on  the  finest  paper,  and  bound  vi^ith  great  taste." 
THE  CHRISTIAN.— "Most  useful  and  valuable." 
WORD  AND  WORK.-"  At  once  compact  and  complete." 
SPECTATOR.—"  Extremely  useful." 
SWORD  AND  TROWEL— "A  real  help." 
PUBLISHERS'  CIRCULAR.— "  Inimitable. ' 
METHODIST  S.  S.  RECORD.— "Unspeakably  valuable." 
FREEMAN.—"  One  of  the  most  valuable  books  ever  published." 
HOMILETIC  MAGAZINE.— "  We  need  only  state  at  the  outset 

that,  after  very  careful  examination  and  comparison,  our  judgment  is 

extremely  favourable.     The  whole  of  the  literary  contents  are  a  marvel 

of  arrangement  and  condensation." 

ENGLISH  CHURCHMAN.— *' This   beautiful   issue  of  the    Holy 

Scriptures  deserves  all  praise." 

LIFE  AND  WORK.— "  Leaves  nothing  to  be  desired." 
THE  BAPTIST  MAGAZINE.— "  In  every  view  admirable." 
THE  SCOTSMAN.—"  Veritable  encyclopsedias  of  Biblical  criticism. 

These  editions  may  be  cordially  recommended  as  works  oi  outstanding 

excellence  among  the  many  before  the  public." 
THE  CHURCH  OF  SCOTLAND  MISSION  RECORD. -"The 

Bagsters  have  laid  the  Christian  world  under  a  deep  debt  of  obligation." 
THE  CHRISTIAN  WORLD.— "A  delight  to  the  eye  and  to  the 

hand,  apart  even  from  the  quality  of  their  contents.     But  that  quality 

is  of  the  highest  kind." 

DEAN  OF    GLOUCESTER.— "  It   is   a   marvellous    compendium, 

containing  a   library  of  information  useiul  and  scholarly,   exquisitely 

printed."  

Eleven  Editions,  prices  froin  ds^ 

London : 
SAMUEL  BAGSTER  &  SONS,  Ltd.,  15  Paternoster  Row,  E.G. 


BAGSTER'S 

COMPREHENSIVE 

TEACHER'S     BIBLE 

With  New  Helps,  New  Concordance,  Indexed  Atlas^ 
and  the  Co?nplete  Bagster  Bible, 

THE   ONLY  TEACHER'S   BIBLE   PUBLISHED   SINCE  THE 
REVISED  VERSION. 


THE  FOLLOWING  PRINCIPALS  OF  COLLEGES 
RECOMMEND  IT  : 

Rev.  W.  AVELING,  M.A.  {Taunton). — '*  Invaluable  to  those  who  con- 
duct Scripture  classes.  Ought  to  be  in  the  hands  of  every  Sunday 
School  Teacher." 

Rev.  J.  AGAR  BEET  {Richmond).— "li  is  by  far  the  best  that  I 
have  seen." 

Rev.  J.  OSWALD  DYKES,  D.D.  {Moderator  of  Synod,  London  Presby- 
terian).— "A  beautiful  Bible  in  all  respects,  most  carefully  edited 
and  well  up  to  date." 

Dr.  J.  G.  GREENWOOD  {Owens,  Manchester). — **  You  have  conferred 
a  great  boon,  not  on  teachers  only,  but  on  all  serious  students  of 
Holy  Scripture." 

Rev.  J.MORRISON,  D.D.  {Free  Chnrch,  Glasgow).— ''The  informa- 
tion is  full  and  marked  by  scholarly  exactness.  Just  such  a  book 
as  should  be  in  the  hands  of  every  Sunday  School  Teacher." 

Rev.  H.  R.  REYNOLDS,  D.D.  {Cheshunt). — "Excels  both  in  range  of 
subject  matter,  order  and  proportion  of  theme,  and  fulness  of 
detail,  any  similar  effort  .  .   .  leaves  nothing  to  be  desired." 

Rev.  ALEX.  WHYTE,  D.D.  {Edinburgh).— '' This  is  well  named  the 
Teacher's  Bible,  and  the  '  Comprehensive  Teacher's  Bible,'  for  it 
comprehettds  the  whole  apparatus  the  teacher  needs. " 

Rev.  C.  H.  SPURGEON. — "It  is  just  what  a  teacher  wants  :  I  do  not 
see  how  it  could  be  better." 


BAGSTER'S 

COMPREHENSIVE  TEACHER'S  BIBLE. 


Professor  SAYCE.  — "  It  is  a  marvel  of  completeness.  Nothing  seems 
to  be  wanting. " 

Rev.  R.  BRUCE,  D.D.  {Chairman  of  the  Congregational  Union  of 
Englajid  and  Wales). — "  It  is  an  exquisite  gem  of  workmanship, 
the  helps  for  students  and  teachers  are  most  comprehensive  and 
invaluable." 

Rev.  J.  CLIFFORD,  D.D.  {President  of  the  Baptist  Union).— '''W.  sup- 
plies the  precise  information  the  teacher  asks  for  and  should  have. " 

Rev.  A.  MACKENNAL,  D.D.  {Ex-Chairman,  Congregational  Union). 
— **  The  work  is  admirably  done  ;  for  fulness,  accuracy,  and  present- 
day  intelligence,  I  do  not  know  any  compendium  equal  to  it." 

Rev.  F.  E.  CLARK  {Boston,  U.S.,  Founder  of  the  Young  People's 
Society  of  Christian  Endeavour). — "  I  hope  that  we  shall  be  able 
to  bring  it  to  the  notice  of  our  young  people  everywhere." 

Miss  MARIANNE  FARNINGHAM.— "  The  Comprehensive  Teacher's 
Bible  will  henceforth  always  lie  on  my  library  table  for  reference 
and  help." 

BOOKSELLER.— "Nothing  short  of  an  exhaustive  apparatus  criticus 
is  placed  in  the  hands  of  the  instructor." 

CHRISTIAN  AGE.—"  The  most  comprehensive  and  complete  work  of 

the  kind." 
METHODIST  TIMES  {Rev.  Hugh  Price  Hughes).—''  A  vast  amount 

of  information  of  the  greatest  value  to  Bible  students." 

SUNDAY  SCHOOL  TIMES.— "  A  perfect  help  to  Bible  study.  The 
best  present." 

FAMILY  CHURCHMAN. — "  More  valuable  to  teachers  than  any  con- 
cordance.    Simply  phenomenal  at  the  price." 


In  Eleven  Editions,  prices  from  Four  Shillings  each. 


SAMUEL  BAGSTER  &  SONS,  LIMITED,  LONDON. 


« 
AIDS  TO  THE  STUDY  OF  THE  HEBREW  SORIPTURES. 


THE  ENGLISHMAN'S  HEBREW  AND  CHALDEE  CONCORDANCE 
OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT. 

^  A  verbal  connection  between  the  Original  and  the  English  Tran.^lation  ; 
with  Indices,  a  List  of  the  Proper  Names  and  their  occurrences,  etc.  Third 
edition.     Two  vols.,  royal  octavo,  cloth,  £2  2s. 

THE   HEBRAIST'S   YADE   MECUM. 

A  complete  Verbal  Index  to  the  contents  of  the  Hebrew  and  Chaldee 
Scriptures.  Arranged  according  to  grammar;  the  occurrences  in  full. 
Demy  octavo,  cloth,  15s. 

THE  HEADS  OF  HEBREW  GRAMMAR: 

Containing  all  the  Principles  needed  by  a  Learner;  with  a  Series  of 
Hebrew  Paradigms.  By  S.  P.  Teegelles,  LL.D.  Foolscap  octavo,  cloth, 
price  2s.  6d. 

A   PRACTICAL   HEBREW   GRAMMAR. 

The  Grammar  with  progressive  constructive  Exercises  to  every  rule; 
and  a  Reading  Book.  By  Dr.  J.  Robert  Wolfe.  Post  octavo,  cloth, 
price  5s. 

A   POCKET   HEBREW-ENGLISH   LEXICON. 

The  Lexicon  contains  all  the  Hebrew  and  Chaldee  words  in  the  Old 
Testament  Scriptures,  with  their  meanings  in  English,  and  combining  tho 
alphabetical  with  the  radical  arrangement  of  the  wordd.  Foolscap  octavo, 
cloth,  price  3s.  6d. 

AN  INTERLINEARY   HEBREW-ENGLISH   PSALTER. 

The  Book  of  Psalms  in  Hebrew,  printed  so  as  to  distinguish  the  servile 
letters  from  the  radical;  with  a  closely  literal  English  translation  under  each 
word.     Foolscap  octavo,  cloth,  price  3s.  6d. 

THE   ANALYTICAL   HEBREW   LEXICON. 

By  this  work  the  student  may  easily  ascertain  the  correct  parsing  and 
the  English  equivalent  of  every  word  in  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures.  All 
the  words  of  the  least  frequent  occurrence  (which  constitute  three-fourths  of 
the  whole  number)  are  supplied  with  a  reference  to  their  place  in  Scripture. 
Under  each  Root  is  given  a  summary  of  the  whole  of  its  derivatives.  The 
Grammatical  Introduction  contains  a  complete  series  of  Paradigms,  which 
are  referred  to  constantly  throughout  the  work.     Quarto,  cloth,  123. 

"  It  is  the  ^dtimatum  of  Hebrew  Lexicography,  and  will  leave  the  Theologian 
who  still  remains  ignorant  of  the  sacred  tongue,  absolutely  without  excuse." 


Date  Due 

0  1  r    •;,; 

^^25'^^ 

^Mjum^p^ 

mmmmmm 

f^^^ 

f) 

